I rarely post two letters from readers back to back, but I received an email today that is both time-sensitive and potentially instructive to readers.

I’ll begin with a confession. The real name of the writer is very unusual, and after reading her letter I had a hunch I wanted to confirm. Sure enough, she is indexed in Google images thanks to social media profiles. It is as I suspected. She is a hard 9, at least, if your taste runs to Kate Upton on a good day. I don’t mean to objectify her, but I think she falls victim to a mentality that is common among beautiful women. It may sound counterintuitive, but beautiful women often have to make a special effort to land a good man, initiating intimacy, providing encouragement and offering reassurance along the way.

My advice would be the same in any case, but her looks are undoubtedly a factor in the dynamic between them.

Dear Susan,

Hi, your blog always gives such insightful advice on relationship issues, and I would love some right now because I’m in a difficult position with the first man I’ve liked in a long time. I’m 22, he’s 25.

I’ve been dating him for around two months now. I ended things with a guy this summer and was deeply depressed for a while, which is why I didn’t want to get emotionally attached too soon. There was a bit of imbalance – he took me out to nice dinners, walked me home, didn’t even make a move. When we started sleeping together, things were great but I was still not completely accommodating – I didn’t offer him coffee/breakfast in the morning, which I kind of regret now. I’m an introverted person and I don’t express emotions very well. Raised that way I guess. Nevertheless, we continued dating and he’d text and call very often.

I haven’t seen him in person for around 3 weeks. It’s sometimes been difficult matching our schedules (he’s working, I’m a student), and I have been travelling the past week. He said he wanted to take me to a lovely dinner the night I came back from an overseas trip. I was jetlagged when back and had a heavy lunch so I suggested a drink instead, and he accepted. I dozed off, got back to him a couple of hours later and said we could meet 45 mins later at which point it would be 10.45. He said it would be “a little too late” because he had to get up early for work, but we could meet the next day. I was pissed – that drink would probably lead to him coming back with me, he hasn’t seen me in 3 weeks, what guy says no to that because he’d get six hours rather than eight? I was so annoyed I said I was busy the next few days. He told me to “let him know when I could see him”.

So when I was out Thursday night I texted him (very late, early hours) asking if he was out too. For a weekday, I figured he might have been in bed. I got a reply the next morning. Friendly, as usual, but he hasn’t initiated anything since.

Worst part – Saturday night was a party hosted by a friend of his – an all night dinner and drinks. He asked me about a month ago and even convinced me to stay in town a far more days to attend. Come Saturday, I heard nothing. I’m just assuming he went to the party without me. I suppose most girls would text and go “what’s going on with that party??”. But I always assume a defensive position towards men – I think until the point of exclusive, the initiatives should be theirs. Plus, I did make an “initiative” Thursday night by texting first.

I was angry and in my irrational rage, I figured this was “finished from my side”, deleted him off facebook and deleted our text message history. That was yesterday, I assume he’s seen it by now, but he hasn’t said anything. I am twisting in agony trying to figure what the reason for his silence might have been… Whether someone said something about me. I can’t figure why, I’m not known as promiscuous, and I don’t think there is anything awful that may surface.

So as you can see I’m going out of my mind. I like the guy, and I know I acted irrationally when deleting him. But his behaviour was really schizo – he was all over me and seemed so genuinely interested, and then shut down on Saturday. I feel like it would be stupid to contact him now, it will seem as if deleting him was a provocation and now I’m “giving in”? I feel like it would give me an instant lower hand. Should I just wait it out?

Am I being completely crazy? Will this end right now if I don’t make a move? Or will I look pathetic? Or is it the case that if he likes me enough, I will hear from him?

It sounds like you’re a regular reader, in which case you’ve seen my posts about avoiding players, and also my posts about the need for a woman to escalate emotionally when a man does get through her filter and she wants to be in a committed relationship with him.

I’m going to cut straight to the chase here.

You have been employing the Principle of Least Interest with such success that you convinced Stephen you are not interested in him. To be fair, you describe yourself as having been hurt fairly recently and feeling somewhat self-protective. It’s hard to escalate emotionally while deliberately delaying intimacy. Being introverted and not emotionally expressive makes this more challenging as well.

It sounds like Stephen was happy to go all out in pursuing you, putting in most of the effort. You already have a sense that you did not give him the reinforcement that would have helped to seal the deal early on, as you mention having regrets about remaining aloof, even after sex. However, I see some poor judgment calls here on your part within the last week or so that I don’t believe you fully recognize. At the risk of being very hard on you, I’m going to highlight them in hopes that you can learn from this experience, whether things work out with Stephen or not.

You did not act eager to reunite with him when you returned from Miami.

I understand that you were jet lagged, and I’m sure he did too. You might have rescheduled, explaining that you were dying to see him but wanted to be at your best. You could also have mentioned that you simply could not function without a couple of hours sleep, would he be amenable to a late drink?

Instead it sounds like you dismissed his plan because you were not particularly hungry (bad call) and then left him waiting and wondering until 10 p.m. That was not very considerate of his time, and it may have played a role in his declining at that point. Or he may have calculated that you would both have a much better time with less pressure by doing it the next day instead. Maybe he wanted to enjoy your company for an evening instead of racing home from the bar to have sex before an early alarm.

You felt rejected, so you punished him.

If a man is rejecting you, punishing him for doing so is not a good strategy for exciting his interest. Had you agreed to the next night, you would likely have had a passionate reunion. Instead, you told him you did not want to see him. His response that you should let him know indicates hurt feelings and hurt pride.

You sought to increase your control over him.

After turning him down, and without letting him know when you were available to see him, and how much you wanted to see him, you texted him while out late on a work night. This served to remind him that you are a carefree student who can be out and about getting attention from other men while he is required to get his sleep before another grueling day at the office. I imagine he woke in the morning, felt peeved, and his resentment grew throughout the day.

Note that you have still not texted to “let him know when you could see him.” You have only texted to convey your fabulousness and desirability on a night when he was unlikely to go out.

You stubbornly waited for him to break.

You entered into a pissing match over who would blink first. It should have been you! Why do you always assume a defensive posture with men? Why are they required to do all the work? You’re bound to intimidate the hell out of most men as it is – they’re going to need some positive reinforcement to keep going! And they’re very likely to assume that they’re unlikely to hold your interest.

Deleting him from facebook probably signalled to him that you have zero interest in him whatsoever, and want all reminders of your association gone.

In short, I don’t think his behavior has been schizo or the least bit unreasonable. I think you’ve been acting like a bit of a spoiled brat. (I say this with a maternal affection.) I don’t know whether this is salvageable, but if you really look at Stephen and see a potential father for your children, here is what I suggest you do:

Go crawling to him on your hands and knees.

Stephen,

I regret the way things have been between us for the last week. I accept responsibility for doing a very poor job of letting you know how much I wanted to see you upon my return. I have enjoyed our time together very much and I’d like to set things right. Are you free tomorrow night? Would you like to come over for a drink and we can talk about it?

Missing you,

Anne

If he is kind but says no, you’ll have time for soul searching. If he is a jerk and really was playing you in some way, he’ll be rude and unresponsive, in which case you just got rid of a bad guy. If he says yes, you’re back in the game. Respond graciously no matter what.

No more silent treatment, it’s time to make a little drama here (the good kind – as in, a dramatic gesture to surprise and delight him).

Absolutely great advice, Susan. If you forced me to guess, I’d say that you read the situation perfectly.

Ramjet

“I really like this guy so I’ll act like I’m not into him to make him attracted! Oh why oh why doesn’t he like me now? :(”

Beautiful
Sane

Pick 1

Rico

A common bit of wisdom – No matter how hot the woman is, some guy is done putting up with her shit.

http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

Yeah, the guy seems to have his act together in terms of relationship mgt skills. He’s not being a dick; because of female intrasexual competition for a dwindling supply of “appropriate” men, even the not-conventionally-hot guys of means are going to be acting this way now, and the hot guys with $$ just won’t tolerate much at all.

The hair-trigger cutaway behavior can actually be more pronounced among LTR-minded guys because they are reacting to feminism and hook-up culture by becoming more judgmental and less and less easy-going—they don’t want to invest resources in lost causes, so they filter for lost causes very aggressively.

JamesV

I will tell you who turns down sex from a hot woman late I night. I do. I seriously value my sleep. A woman that thinks she is so attractive that a guy will put banging her ahead of a good night sleep before a hard days work is showing some narcissistic and entitlement tendencies. That, plus trying to punish him for it the next day, is a sign of a woman whose always been able to get a guy to jump on command.

Personally, if you’d invited me over late at night when we both know sex is a sure sign but where busy the next few days and followed that up by unfriending me on facebook, I might assume you were a slut and were pretty much done using me. If I didn’t assume you were a slut I would be seriously confused and you would likely confirm the belief that the prettiest ones are always the most crazy.

You tried to play some crappy game on him and he’s having none of it. Consider this a life lesson to stop treating guys like they exist to fulfill your whims.

Vicomte

You are causing unnecessary drama.

Senior Beta

Ya gotta admit Susan. Even though Rollo sometimes gets under your skin, sometimes he nails it. Like now. Hot girls have it so tough.

http://www.christianfreethought.com/ IrishFarmer

Pretty girls do have to try harder….to overcome themselves.

Another way to sum up her behavior is that she’s trying to get commitment by filtering the guy with her behavior into either chump or cad. He can either put up with her crap, in which case she’ll likely stop being attracted to him, or he can start to play her games better than her which will probably only be possible if he’s a cad.

If she’d just relax, and try and diminish her “I’m good looking and I know it” behavior, she’d probably (from the sounds of it) be happy to find out that she’s dealing with a guy who’s just enough “cad” and just enough “dad” to have a great relationship with. Maybe.

I think this is the inherent problem with “girl game”. A lot of women are attractive, and want a relationship, but if they learn girl game they’re gonna start doing what this woman did and apply the techniques consistently with their entitled attitude towards relationships and just make things worse.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Irish Farmer

If she’d just relax, and try and diminish her “I’m good looking and I know it” behavior, she’d probably (from the sounds of it) be happy to find out that she’s dealing with a guy who’s just enough “cad” and just enough “dad” to have a great relationship with.

What she needs to do is abandon all sense of pride and/or entitlement. The thing is, I don’t find it useful to blame beautiful women for exhibiting “I’m good looking and I know it” behavior. They are good looking, of course they know it! They feel entitled because it’s rare that they don’t elicit interest from men. They’ve actually reached a logical and correct conclusion.

The real problem is her strategy – she has to let her guard down, something that is very difficult for beautiful women to do. She also needs to make herself vulnerable, something that feels scary after a bad relationship ending this summer.

I think it’s hard for men to believe that hot women have feelings too – they are not invincible, and they attract a lot of cads. They must filter so aggressively that they can become very cynical about men. One very pretty woman I know is very good at filtering out cads, but she says she wishes just one guy would make it through the filter!

Anne describes this guy as short and not handsome. I’m sure the only reason he had any confidence was his wealthy background (which probably feels a bit crappy) and the delight she took in his personality when they met. Of course men want the hottest woman they can get, but they also want to trust that the attraction is real and building toward love.

http://www.rosehope.com Hope

Susan, great post.

However! I would say that just thinking he’d be good husband/father material isn’t enough. At 22 and a student, she will still feel the urge to keep looking. She seems to be playing the Principle of Least Interest game because she isn’t all that interested (not totally in love), but it’s likely that his backing away has made her want to chase him.

If she actually is in love with him, then she should do as you suggested. But if she’s not, then she’s just playing cat-and-mouse games, and should really go back out and find a guy that she’s truly excited about, as opposed to merely “like a lot.”

Also, we don’t know if this guy is dating other women or if they’ve had the exclusive talk. Not enough info there.

Society’s Disposable Son

Position of least interest ruins another relationship.. I should feel something but I don’t anymore…. play games and this is what happens.

Good luck not repeating the same crap with the next guy I think you’ll need it.

VD

You’re bound to intimidate the hell out of most men as it is – they’re going to need some positive reinforcement to keep going! And they’re very likely to assume that they’re unlikely to hold your interest.

This is the main one right here. Any man who is attractive enough to regularly land 8+ women has enough experience to realize that they have no shortage of options. Since he has options too, though not as many, he’s going to be one foot out the door unless/until she signals that she has particular interest in him over all of the others he knows are pursuing her. The more desirable the guy, the easier it is for him to stop the pursuit.

Her actions weren’t intentional, for the most part, and this is more miscommunication than anything. The situation is salvageable, but only if she sends an unambiguous message of her interest in him. She may be introverted and afraid of putting herself at risk, but she’s unnecessarily put herself in a position where it is now required. The big problem was the Miami thing, as Susan correctly noted.

Men know that a woman who is genuinely interested will run herself ragged to see the man she wants. If she’s not, well, she’s probably not all that interested. That’s why it is so important to send very positive signals if you are already run ragged and you simply can’t manage it.

http://www.rosehope.com Hope

There’s also a big cognitive growth spurt between college and after college. The first three years after I graduated, I think I was gaining life wisdom at an exponential rate and losing drama at the same rate of decline. An introvert staying up until wee hours of the morning for fun? In college, totally normal. In the working world, ha!

So there’s that gap to consider between 22 and still in college vs. 25 and working.

http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

@JamesV

You’re posturing

Lokland

Initial impression just from her letter.

Damn girl you friggin nuts.

More later.

Lokland

+1 to other guys

This guy has his LTR game nailed down perfectly.

@Anne

Good luck.
Advice for next time:
Everything you did this time, next time do the opposite.
Actually.

I’m going to disagree with Susan however, the situation isn’t likely salvageable and if it were… would you really be happy with a guy that let a woman treat him like that?

Ramble

Beautiful Women Must Try Harder Not Introduce Unnecessary Drama

Anne

Thanks for a great response, Susan.

The responses on this thread were so strong and opinionated that I had to read through my letter again to check whether the situation was portrayed correctly.
There might be some differences – such as the fact that we are not American, but I get the general message.

I asked a male friend and referenced this blog, he said the advice given was “too general” and not specific for my situation. He advised me to contact this guy in the morning, it’s 11.15pm in London and he might be in bed.

I am worried that giving him a response now will “reward” the fact that he pulled away. Most of all (even if he’s lost interest), I want to know what caused him to pull away on Saturday. We had specific plans, and the “craziness” you observe on my part, happened after that.
I suppose I have little to lose now, other than pride.
I am always reading advice saying that a man will “work to remain in your life if he wants to be”. I feel like I am being pulled from side to side in terms of relationship advice.
I was dating a guy who called me every day, invited me on long weekends, introduced me to friends and wanted to meet my family, and in the end just wanted to sleep with me while he was casually dating a woman in NY. If that is a possible scenario, what hope do I have with a man who quits on me on a Saturday night, not even giving an ridiculous excuse?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Anne

I am worried that giving him a response now will “reward” the fact that he pulled away.

You have every reason to reward his pulling away. You want him and he is now removed from your life. I maintain that the bad behavior was initiated by you. His last instruction to you was to let him know when you want to see him. Did you ever send that text? If not, I think he is justified in assuming Saturday was off.

Look, I’m talking to you like I would talk to my own daughter. I think you acted bratty, and now you need to make nice. He was dominant and collected and refused to put up with your shit. That’s excellent, you should be glad he stood up to you! Now go get him, making it clear you are invested and will treat him in a way that reflects that.

I am always reading advice saying that a man will “work to remain in your life if he wants to be”. I feel like I am being pulled from side to side in terms of relationship advice.

I’ll be honest – that is the He’s Just Not That Into You school of advice, and I’m not a fan. Yes, a cad will remain in your life if he wants to be because he is impervious to fear, rejection, or feelings of attachment. A normal man, a good man with the emotional range you want, will not persevere in the face of constant rejection or lack of interest. You don’t think he noticed that you never offered him coffee or breakfast? A woman trying to lock that down would have been babying him with feminine moves. You’re hot shit, but if you want him, you’re going to have to take a one down position. If you cannot do that and humble yourself, it’s not going to work.

I was dating a guy who called me every day, invited me on long weekends, introduced me to friends and wanted to meet my family, and in the end just wanted to sleep with me while he was casually dating a woman in NY.

This is the Pretty Girl dilemma. You attract Dark Triad males (narcissistic, manipulative, devoid of empathy) because you represent a great conquest and they have nothing to lose. You might as well be dating the Terminator. Unfortunately, these men can mimic desirable personality traits for a short time, and women are often taken in. I’ve heard a lot of these stories, and my guess is that when you look back, there were some signs that he was low on empathy. There always are.

j

Could you please post links about women escalating emotionally? I don’t know where to find those articles and I need them. thanks!

The answer is simple, and yet, quite difficult : How do you get him to chase you ?

What does he do ?
What is he passionate about ?

Joe

Anne, I can’t help but notice that you’ve used phases like “I feel like it would give me an instant lower hand.” and “reward [his behavior].” Reading as dispassionately as I can, it really seems as if you’re attempting to control his actions.

And sometimes, all it takes is the perception to make a guy reconsider his options. Let me suggest that it’s not about gaining the upper hand or about rewarding good behavior like you would a child (or a dog, for that matter). You may very well be surprised if you surrendered the upper hand to him. He may realize that you are golden after all. You may get exactly what you want.

I can’t guarantee that, of course, because you are both strangers to me. But I’ve seen it happen.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Why Rollo, I think that may be the first comment you’ve ever left here that did not include a link.

Deli

I am rooting for Stephen. G’luck mate, you are going to need it either way.

http://natewinchester.wordpress.com/ Nate Winchester

I was dating a guy who called me every day, invited me on long weekends, introduced me to friends and wanted to meet my family, and in the end just wanted to sleep with me while he was casually dating a woman in NY. If that is a possible scenario, what hope do I have with a man who quits on me on a Saturday night, not even giving an ridiculous excuse?

Anne, was that previous guy working? Because if not, there’s your answer. A working dude just does not have the time and energy to put that much effort into anything not the job. Shit’s gotta get done, yo.

“A man who quits on [you]?” Per your letter, you signaled first that you quit on him. Like Susan said, he saw your response and decided to stop bothering. Why would he give an excuse when you signaled “finished” first?

Senior Beta

Anne fell for an alpha. Who has choices. Like more 9s. Who doesn’t need Anne. End of story.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Anne fell for an alpha. Who has choices. Like more 9s. Who doesn’t need Anne. End of story.

I see him as a Vox beta. After all, he appears to be a man of character. He took her out and walked her home without demanding that she suck his dick.

http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

“I feel like I am being pulled from side to side in terms of relationship advice”

You will be pulled from side to side in terms of advice in all spheres of life…who to vote for, what stocks to buy or not buy, what career to follow, etc etc. You have to listen to the advice *and the rationale for the advice* and figure out for yourself what actually makes sense.

Thiefsie

The hamster is strong in this one…

I hope she can salvage the relationship but from what I’m reading, sadly the guy has done what I would do and walk away from the drama (implied or not) and cut ties as soon as Anne did the childish act of deleting him on facebook.

She needs to level a bit more with why she is interested in him as well… Money? Social standing? Personality? Well she needs to understand that to keep money and social standing he needs to work, and probably damn hard… so yes at this early stage she will take second position.

Also, perhaps Anne should follow a little bit of Athol’s Captain and First Officer advice.

Let your guard down for the guy that has got through the filter… work a little harder to attract him. Give him a BJ he won’t forget next time you’re with him.

Anne

@ Nate Winchester
The previous guy was working too. He was co-founder of his brothers’ company (30% owner) and finishing his MBA at the same time. Either way, a 60 hour workweek. All the time he wasn’t working, we spent together. I don’t know where he found the energy to pretend to like me while doing all this – some men get energy that way I suppose?

@ Marellus
He was a manager in a company, but quit a while ago. I’m assuming he’s always doing some work for the family company. Otherwise he’s preparing for gmat tests. He doesn’t need to work, financially speaking.
We’re pretty similar in interests and taste. I’m a very good cook, so I will cook for him sometime – IF we get back in the sweet spot.

I am googling Vox beta to see what that’s about.

VD

I am always reading advice saying that a man will “work to remain in your life if he wants to be.

No, that’s female projection. Women will just about kill themselves to be in a man’s life if they want. High quality men want to know you are loyal before they bother. Don’t make the mistake of projecting your own thoughts and feelings onto him. Men and women are different. Even ALPHA and BETA men think and act differently

I am worried that giving him a response now will “reward” the fact that he pulled away. Most of all (even if he’s lost interest), I want to know what caused him to pull away on Saturday. We had specific plans, and the “craziness” you observe on my part, happened after that.

He’s not a woman. Stop trying to treat him the way you need to be treated. He pulled away on Saturday because of this: “I was so annoyed I said I was busy the next few days. He told me to “let him know when I could see him”.”

He sounds sufficiently in control of himself that, unlike most men, he’s not going to respond to every tiny hint that you might deign to dangle before him. Stop playing games, stop worrying so much about protecting yourself, and indicate your interest in a reasonably straightforward manner. Call him up, tell him you’re really sorry you’ve been such a flake, and see what happens. Ironically, the more coy you attempt to play it, the more likely it is that you’ll get played.

I see him as a Vox beta. After all, he appears to be a man of character. He took her out and walked her home without demanding that she suck his dick.

He could just be a decent Alpha. Or a patient one. They do exist. I think he just senses flakiness and is steering clear until she gets her act together one way or the other. I’ve done that. It’s a positive sign that he’s responding to her and being friendly. If he’d Nexted her, she’d get silence.

VD

I am googling Vox beta to see what that’s about.

Try this. He does sound like a high Beta from the description. Family wealth gives him Alpha trappings without the predatory drive.

http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

@Anne

Ask his opinion on something. Tell him you’ll send him a rose for his trouble. Should he respond, and no matter how he responds, send him a rose. I mean it. If he responds to this, apologise and say you’ll send him some more. If he responds again, tell him that the matter should be discussed further over coffee.

VD

You attract Dark Triad males (narcissistic, manipulative, devoid of empathy) because you represent a great conquest and they have nothing to lose. You might as well be dating the Terminator.

The previous guy was working too. He was co-founder of his brothers’ company (30% owner) and finishing his MBA at the same time. Either way, a 60 hour workweek. All the time he wasn’t working, we spent together. I don’t know where he found the energy to pretend to like me while doing all this – some men get energy that way I suppose?

Oh, see, MBA isn’t even a real degree. lol 😉

At the very least, Guy 2 sounds like he proved his dad-bonafides to you with the turn down offer. It means he has a good head on his shoulders and is going to be a good manager of family finances. I mean no offense to you, but there are things more important than sex (especially long term unless you’re producing offspring). If you’re that worried he’s playing you, find some of his family and get the low down.

Sassy6519

@ Anne

I have been in a similar situation as you are now. Susan is speaking the truth.

If you want to salvage this, you will need to swallow your pride and give him some signals that you are truly interested in him.

It is not uncommon for men to be unsure about whether or not women are interested in them/likes them. That uncertainty is often multiplied tenfold if a woman is very attractive.

I tend to be very aloof around men as well, and it has landed me in situations like yours on more than one occasion. Sometimes, I was willing to stick my neck out and tell the men honestly how I felt about them. Other times, I maintained my aloof demeanor, and they eventually FIDOed.

How much do you want to be with this guy? If you honestly want to date him, you will need to give him more than crumbs of affection to keep his interest.

http://www.christianfreethought.com/ IrishFarmer

@ Susan

“What she needs to do is abandon all sense of pride and/or entitlement. The thing is, I don’t find it useful to blame beautiful women for exhibiting “I’m good looking and I know it” behavior. They are good looking, of course they know it! They feel entitled because it’s rare that they don’t elicit interest from men. They’ve actually reached a logical and correct conclusion.

The real problem is her strategy – she has to let her guard down, something that is very difficult for beautiful women to do. She also needs to make herself vulnerable, something that feels scary after a bad relationship ending this summer. ”

Of course it’s not useful, that’s why I added all of that other rabble to my comment.

Anne

Susan, how can I see who’s ‘liked’ this on fb? I don’t want it floating about on social media.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Susan, how can I see who’s ‘liked’ this on fb? I don’t want it floating about on social media.

I have no idea! Only one person has liked it so far, that’s the good news. But I have no access to information on which reader clicked that button. You should be OK – the readership here is 80-90% American.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Anne, I don’t suppose this guy’s name would be Nick Krauser?

Nick Krauser could never pull Anne. She’s an educated Londoner dating independently wealthy men. His accent is, well, um, not posh, and he’s unlikely to ever be within 100 yards of her. Just saying. The Venn Diagram of Krauser and Anne’s social circles do not touch.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Why would a woman want the conquest of a Dark Triad male? That’s like saying we want the great conquest of alcoholism or heroin addiction. Fun at the beginning perhaps, but soul and life destroying.

A Definite Beta Guy

Oh my…
just checked in today because I saw there was a new post and only 40 comments. I have a busy day today, so I gotta make this quick, and respond to this.

I am always reading advice saying that a man will “work to remain in your life if he wants to be”. I feel like I am being pulled from side to side in terms of relationship advice.

You are misapplying this advice. The problem is that girls can get all worked up over a guy and bend over backwards to see him, when he doesn’t show the SLIGHTEST interest. Did you see He’s Just Not That Into You? I’ll admit this is one of my favorite movies. Here’s what the women screw up in that movie:
-Gigi goes to another part of the city to “return a pen” to a guy who won’t return a phone call
-Scarlett (can’t remember character name) keeps on sleeping with a man who is married to another woman
-Gigi hosts an ENTIRE PARTY for Justin Long’s character, when he is not showing any equivalent interest in Gigi.
-Bradley Cooper’s wife is getting cheated on…and she is working her ASS off trying to save the marriage. What the hell is the goddam point?

The problem is that a girl finds a guy, wants him, and then goes crazy trying to win him over! The flip-side is the guy doing all the work, but that doesn’t make sense EITHER. What Justin Long says in that movie is that he will make SOME effort to meet up with you. Not that he is going to slay a Dragon, solve WWII, build you a desk, and then call you 6 times just to get you to text him.

Both sides have to show some interest, and like Susan said, you need to show some interest or he’s going to just drive on.

Tonight, my GF actually reallly wants to skype me. I can’t because I had to go get gas, then pick up some pottery stuff we painted, check this website for some “recreation,” get my ass exercising for 45 minutes, shower after exercise, cook dinner, eat dinner, wash dishes, cook lunch for tomorrow, check pantry to see if I have the food necessary to make dinner tomorrow, oh fuck I don’t so I need to make a shopping list too, by the way my 401k information came into today so I need to check that, I really would like to look into buying a condo a little more, fuck the sweet table at work is tomorrow and I want to bake some muffins, I want to buy some Disney on Ice tickets for Mom/Dad/Niece to go together which also means I have to text Sister to see when Niece is actually in town, and subtly hint to Mom and Dad that they should keep a weekend free without ruining their Christmas Present, some laundry, blah blah blah my life is boring.

And I don’t even even really have time to skype my girlfriend, who I REALLY care about. I don’t feel bad about it, because I just spent all weekend with her, so she’s being a bit demanding, IMHO.

What in the world makes you think I am going to make massive amounts of effort to see a girl who I think probably isn’t even interested in me? This is my BORING day.

Even if I had more free time, which I spent looking at HUS, I could play Xbox. Or watch a movie. Or look at porn. Or read the new Tom Wolfe.

I don’t mean to rag on you or anything, but this whole “guy does everything” idea is not a good one to have. It doesn’t always work out that way in real life.

Which leads me to this…

The previous guy was working too. He was co-founder of his brothers’ company (30% owner) and finishing his MBA at the same time. Either way, a 60 hour workweek. All the time he wasn’t working, we spent together. I don’t know where he found the energy to pretend to like me while doing all this – some men get energy that way I suppose?

Yeah, certain kinds of people have virtually boundless energy, at least for short time spurts. I once hung out drinking with my friends for 6-7 hours, slept for 3 hours, drove another 3 hours, and ran a half marathon.
I am not Superman but for that period of time it was hard to slow me down.

JamesV

Anne,
What behavior of his do you see as wrong and that you are trying to avoid rewarding?

“You have only texted to convey your fabulousness and desirability on a night when he was unlikely to go out.”
“Consider this a life lesson to stop treating guys like they exist to fulfill your whims.”
“How much do you want to be with this guy? If you honestly want to date him, you will need to give him more than crumbs of affection to keep his interest.”

Nothing more to add, really.

“Ironically, the more coy you attempt to play it, the more likely it is that you’ll get played.”

Voilà. +1

@Marelus
“Tell him you’ll send him a rose for his trouble. Should he respond, and no matter how he responds, send him a rose. I mean it. If he responds to this, apologise and say you’ll send him some more.”

Looks like you’ve mistaken her for a tranny…

http://markymarksthoughts.blogspot.com/ MarkyMark

Man, that chick is too much WORK! If I have to wonder if a gal likes me, then I assume she doesn’t and look elsewhere. If Anne’s man has any sense, then he’ll do likewise.

That reminds me of a saying an old, female friend told me: I graduated from high school for one reason: to LOSE the games! How true it is. Anne would not qualify for my time or interest, given her behavior; given her behavior, Steve would be right in assuming she’s not interested, and would look elsewhere to find someone who IS…

Dinkney Pawson

Anne:

He has been wondering about you for some time. Your lack of affection indicates low emotional investment.

I had such a relationship. She wasn’t as pretty as Susan says you are, but she was cuddly and had nice skin. It was on-again, off-again for longer than I should have let it be.

Search your feelings. You didn’t really want him. Now you think you do. Is it merely the fact that he seems indifferent now?

pvw

I think all the advice to Anne is great.

I am realizing through reading Anne’s discussion of the situation, the significance of the halo effect, that women who are seen to be very beautiful can get away with flaky behavior, because men are tripping over themselves to please them.

Perhaps Anne has been able to do this before with other men who didn’t call her out on it. So Mr. Highly Functioning Beta is forcing her to grow up and realize the world doesn’t revolve around her.

This struck me: “When we started sleeping together, things were great but I was still not completely accommodating – I didn’t offer him coffee/breakfast in the morning, which I kind of regret now. I’m an introverted person and I don’t express emotions very well. Raised that way I guess. Nevertheless, we continued dating and he’d text and call very often.”

Me: This isn’t about being introverted. This is about being a gracious host, which makes me wonder, what the hell is happening out there?

I guess I’m just too old fashioned for words with respect to my upbringing. I remember as a little girl, being instructed and shown by my mom, the value in being gracious in offering hospitality.

If anyone came to our house, the expectation was that they would be offered some refreshment, ie., juice and perhaps a snack. I was to help her in gathering the glasses, the drinks, the trays, etc. And if it was a matter of having time to plan beforehand, I was to do so by making sure I had something on hand to offer.

When I was 22 and in college but living in a dormitory, I remember an instance of some family connections visiting me; we were going on our way to visit some of our mutual relatives. I remember talking to my mom and her asking me whether I remembered my duties as a hostess.

“I didn’t forget, I said, yes mummy, I got a few bottles of juice and some cookies/crackers.” If I didn’t act appropriately, it would have been beyond embarrassing to her, and she would have called me on it.

Heck, she would probably call me out on any rude behavior even today!

Forget about a man visiting with you and not offering him some refreshment, but after sharing sexual intimacies, it just never occurred to you???

Wow, just wow…

Anne

@JamesV
“What behavior of his do you see as wrong and that you are trying to avoid rewarding?”
Mainly blowing me off Saturday. He told me to “let him know” on Tuesday, and I did in fact contact him Thursday (although late). I can understand that he feels he has given more than me, but I thought not taking me to the party was crossing the line. He invited me to this party a month ago and has been talking about how I MUST come.
The main reason I wrote to Susan was that I thought something serious must have happened in the meantime, and I was trying to figure out what. It was so sudden.

@Dinkney Pawson
I was hugely attracted from the first time I met him. I had butterflies waiting for the first text and the first dinner we had together was amazing – I have never laughed so much during one dinner. My only reservation has been that I’ve still struggled with the idea of the last guy I dated and whether the fact that he was on my mind was a problem. But I’ve realized that’s just anger. And when I didn’t see Stephen for some time, I realized how much I missed him. Of course you realize these things more when things get rough. But I wanted him available too. I’m just so used to doing the withholding dance I don’t know any other way.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

I’m just so used to doing the withholding dance I don’t know any other way.

This. I think it’s important to dispassionately view the SMP economics of this. Anne does not play hard to get. She is hard to get. From a male POV, it’s difficult to imagine a more fertile or alluring vessel to carry one’s offspring. Anne’s natural counterpart is the handsomest, smartest, wealthiest, kindest, top male in the tribe. It is her right, because of her own SMV, to reject all men who don’t measure up to that standard. She has no earthly incentive to be “easy to get.” Of course, men want the woman who is hard to get for every other guy and easy to get for himself. But Annes are not easy to get for anyone – they spend their lives deflecting unwanted attention, practicing rejection, and filtering through waves of cads in search of their rightful and natural partner.

In this SMP, the Annes are at a disadvantage. Their natural partners are often players, uninterested in commitment and low in MMV due to their own promiscuity. Anne is to be commended for choosing a man who displays LTR traits. The reality is that any man who holds onto Anne is going to have to be quite dominant – a hero in her eyes. Stephen is off to a good start, as he passed all her shit tests with flying colors. If Anne can find a way to stop withholding and “give in” – to be easy to get for Stephen alone, well then I think they have a shot.

INTJ

@ Anne

Don’t be too hard on yourself. Introvertedness is difficult (I would know haha). But you need to open up a bit, and most importantly, not expect him to show you attention if you’re unable to do the same in return.

@ Susan

All I can say is, wow. You were brutally honest with Anne. Didn’t know you had it in you. 😀

INTJ

@ Ramjet

Beautiful
Sane

I believe it’s beautiful, intelligent, sane, pick two. So yes, it’s possible to get a beautiful and sane girl as long as she has rocks for brains. 😀 Poor Zach…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

What the hell is going on? Two articles in a row, and both times we have a decent consensus between men and women? Madness!

INTJ

@ Bastiat Blogger

Yeah, the guy seems to have his act together in terms of relationship mgt skills. He’s not being a dick; because of female intrasexual competition for a dwindling supply of “appropriate” men, even the not-conventionally-hot guys of means are going to be acting this way now, and the hot guys with $$ just won’t tolerate much at all.

The way I see it, it doesn’t even have to do with whether there is female intrasexual competition or not. I don’t care if I have better options or not. It’s a matter of having basic self-respect. Any guy who has a backbone (though admittedly many lesser deltas don’t) is going to react the way he did.

pvw

@INTJ: I believe it’s beautiful, intelligent, sane, pick two. So yes, it’s possible to get a beautiful and sane girl as long as she has rocks for brains.

Me: Yes, which begs the question, will men go for intelligent and sane even though the woman is merely attractive, cute, pretty (ie., 6-8), or presentable (ie., a 5)….But the temptation for many men seems to make the choice in favor of beautiful and crazy. It is the halo effect. I wonder, if Anne were not as beautiful, ie., a 6-7, what might her behavior have been like? I would guess, far more accommodating (sane) in the hope of locking down a desirable higher beta. Unless there is a greater tendency to female narcissism and flakiness, a 6-7 would realize that she can’t afford to act as though men are always going to put up with garbage….

INTJ

@ pvw

Me: Yes, which begs the question, will men go for intelligent and sane even though the woman is merely attractive, cute, pretty (ie., 6-8), or presentable (ie., a 5)….But the temptation for many men seems to make the choice in favor of beautiful and crazy. It is the halo effect. I wonder, if Anne were not as beautiful, ie., a 6-7, what might her behavior have been like? I would guess, far more accommodating (sane) in the hope of locking down a desirable higher beta. Unless there is a greater tendency to female narcissism and flakiness, a 6-7 would realize that she can’t afford to act as though men are always going to put up with garbage….

Yeah the tendency of men does seem to be to forgo sanity. For me, that’s the most important factor. I can balance off attractiveness and intelligence (though my minimum threshold for intelligence is probably higher, percentile-wise, than my minimum threshold for attractiveness).

Damien Vulaume

@Anne:
“I’m just so used to doing the withholding dance I don’t know any other way.”

You’re just 22. Maybe you might want to consider learning other ways fast…
You don’t want to end up being a trophy wife, do you? Or find yourself alone once your looks fade…

HanSolo

@Anne

Important questions:

On the evening you returned, what time were you supposed to meet for dinner?

Then when you said you wanted a drink instead, what time was arranged or was it left open? This appears to have been at 8 pm and then you went to sleep for 2 hours.

Can you fill in some of the timeline and details before I give my advice?

Not seeing him at an earlier time the night you came back plus telling him that night you were busy for the next few days are what got this whole thing rolling so understanding what must have been going through his head that night is key to everything.

Damien Vulaume

@pvw:
“which begs the question, will men go for intelligent and sane even though the woman is merely attractive, cute, pretty (ie., 6-8)”

Yes, at least sane men.

HanSolo

@Anne

I guess my point is that it seems like he was probably expecting to meet for the drink soon after 8 (maybe around 8:45 since 45 min was the time lag you suggested when you texted him at 10) and not at 10:45. So if he was just left waiting for 2 hours then I can see why he might have thought you were uninterested. He may have really needed to get sleep and thought it would be better to just see you the next day when you could both spend more time and not be rushed.

pvw

@INTJ: Yeah the tendency of men does seem to be to forgo sanity. For me, that’s the most important factor.

Me: I can understand that. It seems to me a sane and balanced man is going to want sanity in his life.

It is about knowing the value in having a girlfriend/wife who is in the words of my French-speaking mother-in-law, “une jeune fille tres bien elevee,” (I’m missing some accents here) a young woman raised with “good home training,” manners, etc.

Thank God for my old school Caribbean immigrant mom!

pvw

Damien Vulaume December 18, 2012 at 11:49 pm

@pvw:
“which begs the question, will men go for intelligent and sane even though the woman is merely attractive, cute, pretty (ie., 6-8)”

Yes, at least sane men.

Me: Which might imply then that the insane ones go for the insanity of the hot craziness! This was probably at the heart of Karen’s dilemma in the last post; she was merely presentable/cute/pretty and sane, no competition (in the eyes of her boyfriend) for the hot insanity of her sister…

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@pvw

Which might imply then that the insane ones go for the insanity of the hot craziness! This was probably at the heart of Karen’s dilemma in the last post; she was merely presentable/cute/pretty and sane, no competition (in the eyes of her boyfriend) for the hot insanity of her sister…

Good point! We should add a red flag – any man who says is ex (or heaven forbid, his exes) were crazy, psycho or insane should be summarily dismissed! I think a lot of these men get hooked on the dopamine rush of conflict and agitation followed by makeup sex. They learn to crave the unpredictability and find it genuinely arousing. Guys here have said the men put up with crazy behavior for the sex, but I would go further and say they seek women with crazy behavior for the sexual and emotional roller coaster. I’ve seen guys get sucked in by really unstable women, where the instability was part of the attraction.

jason773

Anne,

You messed up and you keep making excuses as to why you didnt and why he should continue chasing. Im a 25yo american male with a plenty of options, just like it sounds for your guy, and the simple fact is that all this crap isnt worth it. In my view this guy has been more than accomodating towards you and showed real interest while you have continually rebuffed him.

From the talk of susan you sound really good looking, but this guy prob can get other good looking women so you need to do more. Maybe he ends up with an 8, rather than a 9 like yourself, but one who is very caring, sweet and doesnt play these games. The latter is definitely worth it when looking for a relationship.

Swallow your pride, take a chance and follow susans advice here.

Senior Beta

Susan @ 49

Thanks for clearing that up. So a London model type 9 is working through wealthy young Brits to find the right match. And gets pissed when one does not supplicate. Now I have it. Thought you were trying to help a stressed out American like the last poor gal with the threat of a slut sister. You need a vacation.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Senior Beta

So a London model type 9 is working through wealthy young Brits to find the right match. And gets pissed when one does not supplicate. Now I have it.

???I don’t see how my comment at 49 relates to your response. First, Anne is not working her way through anything. She is 22, and recently ended a serious relationship, and she is dating Stephen with the express intention of possibly marrying him.

She has very high SMV and is surely on any short list of highly desirable and eligible women in London. Why on earth would she go for a broke PUA who accosts her with a webcam and a cocky funny routine at an intersection?

Thought you were trying to help a stressed out American like the last poor gal with the threat of a slut sister. You need a vacation.

Why did you think that? She’s neither American, nor stressed out, poor or coping with her man’s having eyes for her sister. She’s not a victim, nor did I treat her as one. I urged her to take responsibility for her feelings and change her behavior.

Unless I’m missing something, your comment strikes me as oddly defensive. Are you white knighting for a PUA? Is that the career Anne should be seeking in a mate?

Damien Vulaume

@pvw:
“which might imply then that the insane ones go for the insanity of the hot craziness! This was probably at the heart of Karen’s dilemma in the last post”

Insane or hoplessly imature, or suckers for beauty. Yes, that was probably at the heart of Karen’s dilemma. It would have been interesting to see pictures of both sisters. I’m making an assumption here but seeing the picture of the supposedly hot sister would have had me ROFL even more at that pathetic boyfriend. Just my instinct.

http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

Anne,

I always say that with a women (and presumably men as well), you don’t truly know the strength of their character until you observe how they deal with adversity. I’ve had a couple girlfriends I thought had very strong personae fall to pieces when life threw them a curveball. This situation here and now is giving him a nice illustration of your character. By your own admission, he has invested far more effort into the relationship than you have. The particular details of what precipitated this minor crisis is totally irrelevant: it’s time for you to reciprocate his investment, or quit.

Poop or get off the loo.

http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

‘are totally irrelevant’, geesh…

http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

@DV

Looks like you’ve mistaken her for a tranny…

Looks like Anne’s mistral will respond to such mischief …

Emily

If a girl is going to act this way in her relationships, then she’s going to end up having to be extremely hypogamous, even if she is beautiful. An attractive, confident man simply is not going to put up with this kind of behaviour. The remaining options are either: a) flings with cads who will P&D you b) a LTR with a snivelling gamma who will worship the ground you walk on because of your beauty, no matter how you treat him.

…I can’t imagine either of these options being particularly appealing, so I’d say an attitude adjustment is probably in order.

Damien Vulaume

@Marelus
I’m more worried about the real mistral than hers.
Sorry if that remark offended you, but you seem to misread her behavior if you seriously think that she’d send roses to the guy….

Melissa

First off….the patronising of Anne’s good looks is WAY TOO MUCH (So much that it sounds condescending)!…..I wonder if she finds it annoying when people constantly revert back to her good looks in any topic of discussion, especially of this kind.

Besides the patronising, I think Susan’s advice is perfect.

pvw

Re. DamienV at 72: your suggestion to add onto insane, “hoplessly immature, or suckers for beauty” (I would add, as per the halo effect), I can agree with that.

And that is probably going on here, as I mentioned the “halo effect,” but the guy has pulled a fast one, which she never saw coming which is why she is in knots:

“Still, I have often ended up dating guys who are not exactly George Clooney, and have had comments that I could do “a lot better”. Stephen is extroverted, funny, well educated and from a very wealthy background, but he’s not “handsome” and a bit on the shorter side (I’m 5”9). I don’t know if it’s relevant, but I’ve had the feeling all along that he feels very lucky to be with me.”

Re Jason at 70: “From the talk of susan you sound really good looking, but this guy prob can get other good looking women so you need to do more. Maybe he ends up with an 8, rather than a 9 like yourself, but one who is very caring, sweet and doesnt play these games. The latter is definitely worth it when looking for a relationship.”

Me: He might even be able to go lower and still be “safe,” in that she has admitted as per the quote she provided that he is not handsome, while (according to Susan) she is in the 9 category. He could be anywhere, but I would guess 5-8, as she said he is below her in looks.

And this has been typical for her: with respect to the looks of the men she dates, she can do “a lot better”. Less handsome men with money are so grateful to get her attention (ie., they want a trophy?) that they will do anything for it. As with many wealthy men who are not “handsome,” their money makes them more appealing, so they can pull the 8+ women. So that is what is at stake.

This makes for an interesting affirmation of game: very attractive women need serious game to get them in line. She took him for granted while he seemed very accomodating; it was what she expected, that the lowly serf (as all the other serfs before) would worship at her feet and be grateful for the bones she tossed his way. But now that the tables are turned and he doesn’t reward her rude behavior, she believes he is “playing games.”

Perhaps there needs to be more assortive mating here…Highly Functioning Beta needs a woman like him, perhaps a 5-8 who can appreciate him.

Let Gisele look for her Tom Brady.

pvw

Re Melissa at 78: I wonder if she finds it annoying when people constantly revert back to her good looks in any topic of discussion, especially of this kind.

Me: But she made it a central part of her analysis in explaining the pattern of interactions she has had with the man she is dating.

http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

@Damian Velum

She must do the entire rose-thingy in a tongue-in-cheek manner. That way she doesn’t loose face, and the mistral is at once blindsided, piqued, and motivated to reframe.

LongLostFriend

Anyone else notice that Anne’s not heeding any of the excellent counsel here, but rather merely defending herself and her bad choices?

Another case of a vapid female seeking affirmation, not advice…

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Another case of a vapid female seeking affirmation, not advice…

I feel compelled to say that I find the display of bitterness from some of the males downright embarrassing. Gee, I hope Anne can deal with the shock of your not wishing you could date her!

Beautiful women have their own issues in the SMP – the top women and the lower males are the big losers post Sex Rev. Anne never claimed to be perfect, and I think she’s taking the feedback with grace. She has acknowledged her own mistakes and weaknesses in general – from her first letter to me. She is well aware that she has been emotionally aloof, and seeks to improve herself.

I believe Anne welcomes constructive criticism, which is what I hope we can provide – a constructive approach, or strategy, for her to succeed in this relationship.

Damien Vulaume

@Marcellus
Miscommunication probably. So the mistral here is the guy she’s treating like classic prima donnas do? I thought you meant to use the mistral (the wind in Provence) as a metaphor for her wrath.
Even tongue in cheek, I doubt she’ll do it.

JamesV

Anne,
Look at it from his perspective. Given the way you treated him his reaction actually is very reasonable.

After not seeing him for 3 weeks he was so important to you that you went to sleep. OK, so maybe he really is important to you and accidents happen. No problem. You invite him out later that night but it is already too late and he is ready for bed. This should be no problem because adults don’t act like college students. Maybe he could have gone but it is perfectly reasonable for an adult to not start his evening at 10:30pm. However, as you said, you decided to pretend you were busy for a while.

So, you expected him to have no problem with you breaking plans to sleep yet you weren’t willing to allow him the option of not even making plans because he was getting sleep. You expected a sacrifice from him that you weren’t willing to make. And it is all downhill from here.

From his perspective the girl he was interested in broke plans with him, tried to change them to fit her convince (at an inconvenient time for him btw), blew him off with an indefinite time frame of when she’d be available again, tried once more to squeeze him in at her convenience (when she should no from prior experience his is unlikely to be available).

Based on the behavior he saw you might want to consider that his decision not to take you to the party was reasonable. You gave him many signs that he was only important enough for you to squeeze into your life when you had time. It makes perfect sense that he would reciprocate and back off of his interest in you to the same level.

Every single problem in this relationship since your trip is because of your unreasonable expectations, pique and caprices.

Damien Vulaume

@LongLostFriend
“Anyone else notice that Anne’s not heeding any of the excellent counsel here, but rather merely defending herself and her bad choices?”

Absolutely. I found her subsquent comments very revealing of her frame of mind. The prima donna type.
But it’s not so much seeking affirmation. My take is that she genuinely doesn’t see where she did go wrong. She is already (and at just 22, at that) way too used to expect to treat even a guy she likes and is with as if he’s at her disposal.
That Stephen sounds like a perfect gentlemen. They already have an intimate relationship together (but obviously not a love one) and yet she can’t help but keep pulling those those tricks.

http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

@DV

What I find amazing is how the advice is given. And it’s given with the tact and circumspection of a Sandor Clegane … when what’s called for, is the mannerisms of a Tyrion Lannister.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Marellus

What I find amazing is how the advice is given. And it’s given with the tact and circumspection of a Sandor Clegane … when what’s called for, is the mannerisms of a Tyrion Lannister.

Did you just compare me to Sandor Clegane? How would you have advised Anne differently?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

Melissa: “The remaining options are either: a) flings with cads who will P&D you b) a LTR with a snivelling gamma who will worship the ground you walk on because of your beauty, no matter how you treat him.”

Probably the best summation so far. Except, being part of an alpha rotation is far more likely than a pump and dump. That, and even a decent normal delta will probably fold like a card table in her presence… a gamma is taking it too far.

She’s definitely locking herself out of the beta LTR market with her behavior. What’s amazing is this guy hasn’t bumped her to ladder two and accepted some booty calls. My take: he has other prospects, or, is one of the rare single-ladder types. If he’s the latter, go back and beg because he won’t be for long.

Maven3

Nice
That’s exactly what awakens my inner player…

Now you have two choices:
– go back to him and you have lost lots of power. Guy might use it or not – depending how genuine is he
– wait for next attractive guy to come (might be year or never)

Do you trust guy?

Damien Vulaume

@Marelus.
It’s hard to decipher what you mean through the fog of your references. I have no idea who those two characters could be. Some pop “culture” reference maybe?
I suppose you mean that Susan’s or everybody else’s advices to the girl were too blunt? If so, I believe that frank and direct explanations will be more helpfull to her than sugar coated, serpentine ones.

Anne

@ LongLostFriend
I am simply replying to the questions which were asked directly. I thought filling them in on the information they wanted would be useful.
I haven’t rejected any advice given (except maybe the “rose” thing…). In total, most of what people have said is some variation of the advice Susan gave – I emailed her when I read it for the first time and told her it was an eye-opener, especially this “carefree student” scenario.

I do find this thread to be very focused around looks. I cannot rate this guy from 1-10 – there is a reason that scale is used mostly for women. A guy’s “rate” says little about his overall attractiveness, but it can be significant for how he sees himself. Men are visual, and many falsely assume women are too. My note on his appearance was a small paragraph at the end of my email. If Susan assumed he was very good-looking, she might have given different advice. Or he might have been labeled an alpha – maybe he is anyway, I don’t know, I don’t have sufficient ‘knowledge’ about these personality types. Either way, it was natural to give SOME mention of his looks. I find him very attractive, and I am sure other women do too.

A Definite Beta Guy

@ Melissa

First off….the patronising of Anne’s good looks is WAY TOO MUCH (So much that it sounds condescending)!…..I wonder if she finds it annoying when people constantly revert back to her good looks in any topic of discussion, especially of this kind.

I hate to tell you this, but I have a feeling the unconscious thought process working in the minds of many men right now is wayyyyyy worse than what’s being communicated.

Men-Folk, in particular the guys here, tend to really like women. That’s why we pedestalize them so much. It’s why the guys keep coming here again and again, we honestly love women.

You have to figure this is biologically programmed to a great extent 😛

Anne is not getting that welcome here, which makes you wonder what else might be playing deep in the lizard-brain. It’s probably not pretty.

No worries, Anne, you’ll be fine. You’re 22. You have to do some work, just like allllllll the rest of have to do, but I’m fairly confident that you are trying to learn and will be able to put Susan’s good advice into practice.

Cooper

Anne,
I think all this is stemming from you blowing him off when you got back from Miami. Read JamesV’s comment #84 – he wrote exactly what I was thinking while reading the post.

I actually think this guy sounds like a really good guy.

@Susan
If I can remember correctly, sounds like Anne need to do, in your words, some “Coopering.”

pvw

Some random thoughts re:

Hope at 15: So there’s that gap to consider between 22 and still in college vs. 25 and working.

Anne at 92: In total, most of what people have said is some variation of the advice Susan gave – I emailed her when I read it for the first time and told her it was an eye-opener, especially this “carefree student” scenario.

ADBG at 93: No worries, Anne, you’ll be fine. You’re 22. You have to do some work, just like allllllll the rest of have to do, but I’m fairly confident that you are trying to learn and will be able to put Susan’s good advice into practice.

Me: I know there have been occasional debates where I believe Susan have urged college aged women interested in long term relationships leading to marriage, to consider guys who are a bit older as the college market is impossible to navigate.

Some guys have bought the argument, others have not, because they have seen or experienced some of what has been described here. Not all young college girls who have not made the transition from school to work are mature enough to negotiate a grown up relationship with a man who is an adult in the working world.

Escoffier

Wow, Susan, this is the second post in like three weeks I find nothing to complain about!

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Wow, Susan, this is the second post in like three weeks I find nothing to complain about!

I guess that means I have my afternoon free!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

Sue: “Anne does not play hard to get. She is hard to get.”

I disagree with your entire comment.

Having a huge filter is perfectly fine in the rejection phase, but she’s playing these flakey games even when she likes him after sex. Being hot doesn’t mean you get a free pass out of being a decent person, and continuing these games too long is the very thing that will keep her from having a decent relationship with a self-respecting Vox Beta.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@OTC

Being hot doesn’t mean you get a free pass out of being a decent person, and continuing these games too long is the very thing that will keep her from having a decent relationship with a self-respecting Vox Beta.

I don’t think it has anything to do with decency. Her problem is strategic – she is signaling a low level of emotional involvement, even though she feels quite emotionally invested.

I suggest that her tendency to withhold and reject is partly born of necessity. She is guarded and wary of men. For every good guy who sacks up to ask her out, I can guarantee you she has to reject 9 cads. A woman like Anne can see her N skyrocket if she does not arduously filter for character. One way of filtering is waiting to see which men are truly in it for the long haul, as evidenced by the tenacity of their pursuit. There is some validity to this approach, as cads will rarely stick it out. The risk, of course, is that she wears down the good guy, as she has apparently done in this case.

Maven3

“Nick Krauser could never pull Anne. She’s an educated Londoner dating independently wealthy men. His accent is, well, um, not posh, and he’s unlikely to ever be within 100 yards of her.”

“Just saying. The Venn Diagram of Krauser and Anne’s social circles do not touch.”
Ha – good point. Could be Krauser – he’s daygamer in London like me and this sounds like PUA tactics.
I am less sociopath, but I have been pulling chicks like those before, so it’s not about social circles (street has everything – from strippers to models).

Anna, if this guy of yours is bald guy around 35 – run fast and and don’t look back.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Could be Krauser – he’s daygamer in London like me and this sounds like PUA tactics.

Or maybe he has natural dominance and self-respect…

The idea that any PUA would be in this situation is laughable.

Anne: What do you do for a living?

PUA: Chase pussy.

Anne: Excuse me?

PUA: I get my dick wet professionally.

Anne: Is that lucrative?

PUA: No, I’m broke.

http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

One thing that seems increasingly clear to me is that the quality, provisioning-capable LTR-minded men in the SMP are deeply concerned about malinvestment.

-They know about the so-called “35 Wall” vs. the later age of marriage and the tension that this creates for women;

-they know about female complaints regarding the scarcity of good men;

-they know that many women want the SAHM option and that many/most men cannot provide it;

-and they know about how their hot player friends have been behaving in this environment and about the popular “carousel” and “alpha fucks, beta bucks” memes.

As a result, we see among the high-MMV male crowd an obsession with chastity and female N (as witnessed here many times) and a near zero-tolerance view towards behavioral problems. Basically the quality, in-demand guys in the SMP who are unrestricted are just taking on the player lifestyle, while the ones who are restricted are becoming extremely choosy and judgmental (I read the phrase “Taliban Jim” recently and have started using it because I think that it is an amusing, not-wholly-inaccurate way to describe this latter type).

I wonder if it is safe to safe that the age of the pure Mr. Nice Guy may be nearly over, at least where high SMV or MMV men are concerned. Successful Girl Game strategists (such as Susan’s proteges) will of course adapt to these scarcity conditions, but I fear that many may seek refuge in completely counterproductive, pro-entitlement/narcissism tracts like The Rules.

Erwan

Anne,

I am short (5.3) and used to be a lowly omega who couldn’t have a date to save my life. Lost my virginity at the ripe age of 36. I am now a local political figure, light years away from your world, but I still get approached reasonably frequently (reject most of them, by the way).

That to tell you I know both attitudes, and they are worlds apart. The perpetually dateless nerd will accept anything to get a bit of attention from anything remotely resembling a woman. The man who gets some attention from women will be far more picky, especially for what concerns character, not so much because they have options (that kind of thinking belongs to cad-land) but because they tell themselves : she is beautiful, but immature and that’s not what I want, so let’s move on.

In your case, I’d suggest swallowing your pride and going back to him to apologize and tell him what you feel. The rules are not the same for quality men : they look for a partner, not some bratty arm-candy, and a partner is an adult.

As for your previous boyfriend, he was a cad, nothing more. Genuine people have emotions, and that keeps them from being too smooth.

And, Longlost, I wouldn’t be so severe. Changing one’s perspective on life is quite hard, but asking is the first step. Let the one who never deluded himself throw her the first stone. I certainly won’t.

A final word of warning. One of my friends is (was) as beautiful as you are, intelligent with a prestigious diploma and more connected than I could dream of being. The same kind of girl as you (and yes I did a lot of orbiting around her and got friendzoned fair and square). She is now fourty, single and childless, not particularly successful professionally with more than twenty serious ex-boyfriends behind her. She has been dateless for nearly a year now and things are not getting better. Frankly I am bit worried since I value her as a friend.

Don’t be her

Shiner

This whole sitch is awash now. She might as well seek out someone new. She fouled up big time with the Miami thing and really screwed the pooch on that one. Even if they managed to work things out Anne might sabotage things in the future and I can’t blame Stephen one iota for his actions at this point. Realize too that you don’t come across too many men that will pique your interest and draw you in like Stephen especially since it sounds like he is very charismatic. He sounds very analytical too so much in fact that he knew when to exactly cut and run and not look back…for his sake, not being mean, just sounds like Anne will have to make drastic changes in a short time frame because as other posters above already stated he won’t be lacking in the interested females for long.

http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

@Anne

I haven’t rejected any advice given (except maybe the “rose” thing…)

Oh well, try a cactus then … I really liked the small cacti one of my female friends gave me (this after I mentioned to her, that I wanted a low maintenance garden one day, where I just have to piss on the plants and they’re happy) … and stay away from gifts like this. Now put on your combat mascara, watch some Black Adder comedies, eat a kebab … and start plotting Annie …

I usually don’t feel I have the right to weigh in on other people’s relationship issues, but:

“So, you expected him to have no problem with you breaking plans to sleep yet you weren’t willing to allow him the option of not even making plans because he was getting sleep. You expected a sacrifice from him that you weren’t willing to make. And it is all downhill from here.”

I agree, that’s where it all went wrong.
But that goes for any woman, not just the really pretty ones, right?

(What are all of the “girl game”/emotional escalation posts again? It’s almost Christmas but I’ve felt rather cold lately.)

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Aunt Giggles making HB# calls? Now that’s a post I’d like to read.

If you must know, I ran her pic by a few guys…virtual jaws dropped. One asked if it was Kate Upton, hence the comparison. Of course, they just confirmed what I already knew.

http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

@Suzan

Did you just compare me to Sandor Clegane? How would you have advised Anne differently?

… Suzan-deary … I’ll come and mow your lawn … and I’ll wear tight fitting pants with a be-view-tiful g-string, so that you may have no trouble locating my poor sexy arse for spanking, if my workmanship is shoddy …

Damien Vulaume

@Erwan:
Great post. Very honest and sensitive. The last part of my comment at #64 also had to do with this:
“A final word of warning. One of my friends is (was) as beautiful as you are, intelligent with a prestigious diploma and more connected than I could dream of being. The same kind of girl as you (and yes I did a lot of orbiting around her and got friendzoned fair and square). She is now fourty, single and childless, not particularly successful professionally with more than twenty serious ex-boyfriends behind her. She has been dateless for nearly a year now and things are not getting better. Frankly I am bit worried since I value her as a friend.”

Wooof! The world is small. What you describe is 90% percent the current situation of one of my distant relatives: A 50 years old former model who orbited in the show biz area. Countless successful, high profile boyfriends… Now single and childless, modeling now LONG gone and no genuine men wanting to come near her. Last time I heard from her through my sister, she was on med for depression.

Zach

@Anne

I agree with Susan on this one, but let me try and frame it in perhaps a more relatable manner. Let’s take this situation and imagine that the roles are reversed (his actions ascribed to you and yours to his). You have some really good first dates, things move along, and you start sleeping together. You leave on a trip, and you really want to see the guy you’re dating when you get back. However, that guy completely flakes on you when you get back (I don’t think you realize how big a slap in the face to him this was). Given that he flaked on you, you tell him it’s up to him to reschedule (the right move). He doesn’t reschedule, and instead his next communication is a straight-up, full-on booty call. If that was the situation, most of your gfs, and guy friends, would tell you to run for the hills, because all the guy is interested in is sex. So imagine it from that point of view.

Second, to go back to the flaking on him, it’s much worse than you made it out to be. He’s busy with work. He sets aside time to meet you for dinner. Dinner usually means reservations. You say you fell asleep. So there he is, with reservations for dinner, perhaps even at the restaurant (how would he know not to show up?), and you as a no show and incommunicado. He’s just been completely stood up and publicly embarrassed. You then barely apologize and say you’d be up for drinks much later. Even if he didn’t go to the restaurant, he may even have told his friends he was going to dinner with you, and then you just disappear. It’s a pretty humiliating situation. I would have acted exactly as he did. I would have put the burden completely on you to make it up to me, and if you didn’t, goodbye. You made no effort to make amends. Instead you booty called him. If you think that means anything to a guy who actually wants to date you, you’ve got to re-think your priorities. It may be that most guys are so blown away by the idea of having sex with you that they accept sex as an apology, but any guy with options will just be offended, as you would be were you in his shoes and a guy did that to you.

In summary, I think this guy is into you and did want to date you, but he is a guy who has other options, and isn’t blinded by your beauty. He’s unwilling to put up with your disrespect just to be dating you. He acted almost exactly as I would have acted.

PS Seems like you have a history of dating wealthy older men even though you’re in college. You’re doing two things there: you’re swimming with the sharks (the guys who use their money to get laid), or you’re putting a HUGE red flag on yourself, because those guys who are into you will think you’re just after their money.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Zach

Seems like you have a history of dating wealthy older men even though you’re in college. You’re doing two things there: you’re swimming with the sharks (the guys who use their money to get laid), or you’re putting a HUGE red flag on yourself, because those guys who are into you will think you’re just after their money.

I was nodding along to your comment until this P.S. First, I do not consider 22-25 a notable age difference that amounts to Anne dating “wealthy older men.” He’s a 25 yo rich guy. Second, you make assumptions about Anne’s own circumstances. I think it’s fair to say she runs in a crowd that is very high status, herself included. Anne and Stephen are well matched socially.

pvw

Sai

“So, you expected him to have no problem with you breaking plans to sleep yet you weren’t willing to allow him the option of not even making plans because he was getting sleep. You expected a sacrifice from him that you weren’t willing to make. And it is all downhill from here.”

I agree, that’s where it all went wrong.

But that goes for any woman, not just the really pretty ones, right?

Me: I would agree, but I wonder whether the less pretty ones are forgiven as much???? It is the beautiful/sane/crazy matrix. When a woman is a lot more attractive, her craziness seems to be more expected or it is forgiven for whatever reason.

Lisa C

@Anne

Sorry if I missed this, but did you reply to his Friday morning text? Wouldn’t that have been the time to start setting up definite plans for the weekend?

Zach

@Susan

Any college girl dating a guy out of college is dating an older man. The difference in life experience, maturity and priorities is huge. And if I recall correctly, both her boyfriends had family money, which is very, very different than guys who are high-status because they went to great schools, got good jobs, etc.

Joe S.

At 22, would anybody really fully understand what to look for in a potential life partner. Everybody I knew at 22 was more focused on how to secure a job (graduated ’09, deep on the recession) and keeping the good time going rather than what who would be a great partner.

In the 3 and 1/2 years since I’ve graduated I’ve faught hard to secure a good job, seems relatives foreclosed on, seen my good friends form family, lost my apartment as most of what I owned and move on again. So have a lot of people I know who in my age range (26-30). I don’t know of someone still in school or fresh out would have the maturity to really match up well in a relationship with someone who’s been grinding it out the world for a few years. I think that’s what we’re mostly seeing here.

pvw

@Susan regarding guardedness. I find it interesting that you see more in her behavior as indicating low emotional investment, while others see it is a matter of basic decency.

It is possible to have low emotional investment and be guarded, at the same time one is polite and decent in behavior. It is not as though she needs to be running around declaring undying love and telling him how much she likes and appreciates him.

Common courtesy and decency doesn’t require that, and that is what is so apparent in all her discussions of her interactions with him, a lack of consideration which seems to border on disrespect, not low emotional investment.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@pvw

Common courtesy and decency doesn’t require that, and that is what is so apparent in all her discussions of her interactions with him, a lack of consideration which seems to border on disrespect, not low emotional investment.

You’re right, I agree that her actions have been disrespectful. If it was a guy doing those things I’d be saying “He’s a cad, run away!”

I think where I’m finding some empathy is in her having genuine feeling for him, but expressing it poorly. Pretending you don’t care for someone when you do is less objectionable than pretending you do care for someone when you don’t, IMO.

It sounds to me like a lot of her distancing behavior, i.e. no breakfast in the morning after sex, was meant to prevent a strong emotional attachment from forming on her end. Her motive was self-protection. That does not excuse discourteous behavior, but it does shed light on her intent, which was not to use this guy in any way. There is the rebound factor at work here, which suggests that she was not truly emotionally available when she met Stephen.

Maven3

@Susan Walsh
“The risk, of course, is that she wears down the good guy, as she has apparently done in this case”

The “cad” might be normal guy, who just noticed how girls operate and adjusted. She started playing this game, he just followed.

I am currently dating very nice asian girl – nevertheless, she shit tested me hard from start. Kiss close on d6 (no fclose yet) – without PUA experience, I will be over already. That’s reality.
Given a chance, I will commit to her.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Maven3

I am currently dating very nice asian girl – nevertheless, she shit tested me hard from start. Kiss close on d6 (no fclose yet) – without PUA experience, I will be over already. That’s reality.
Given a chance, I will commit to her.

Your intent is clearly honorable and I respect it. I hope it works out for the two of you!

pvw

So it is a matter then of shit-testing for character through her indication of low investment and the principle of least interest, ie., does he really like me? As compared to her shit testing for character because she can seem self absorbed and inconsiderate of others, shit testing because she wants to see whether he will jump? In this case, it seems that is what the guy thought; she was shit testing his character in a way which proved something more about her that he didn’t like….

LJ

“Anna, if this guy of yours is bald guy around 35 – run fast and and don’t look back.”

Uh, she’s 22 and hot. Probability that her guy is bald OR 35 is 0.1%

http://www.theredpillroom.blogspot.com Ian Ironwood

I do find this thread to be very focused around looks. I cannot rate this guy from 1-10 – there is a reason that scale is used mostly for women. A guy’s “rate” says little about his overall attractiveness, but it can be significant for how he sees himself. Men are visual, and many falsely assume women are too. My note on his appearance was a small paragraph at the end of my email. If Susan assumed he was very good-looking, she might have given different advice. Or he might have been labeled an alpha – maybe he is anyway, I don’t know, I don’t have sufficient ‘knowledge’ about these personality types. Either way, it was natural to give SOME mention of his looks. I find him very attractive, and I am sure other women do too.

Anne: While you are correct about the differences in Sex Rank between men and women, I don’t think you understand them completely.

For women, SR is about 60-70% appearance-based. Therefore you can look at a picture and probably figure out a woman’s SR within a couple of points, as Susan did with you. Now, that number could slide up or down dependent on the other 30-40% — for example, if you were drop-dead gorgeous and a hardcore IV drug user, or just batshit crazy, or kept 300 cats in your bathroom, that would drop you a couple. The good news (for women) is that they can use cosmetics and wardrobe and obfuscation to boost their SR temporarily.

But with men, establishment of Sex Rank is far more contextual. He might be a 9 but not look like a nine. For men, only about 40-50% of their SR is physical. The other 50-60% is contextual. His social status, wealth, affability, popularity, and other factors add to his attractiveness. Don’t believe me? Google the study that showed women saw the same dude (“bloke”) as more handsome when he stood in front of an expensive Italian sportscar than when he stood in front of a mini.

There is also an age component to SR. A woman might be an 8 when she’s 20, but when she’s a 30 year old 8 she’s still a 7 compared to a 20 year old. It’s as if women get “paid” the bulk of their attractiveness all at once, over a few years, while men get a steadily-increasing amount every year. This is just a fact of life, not a value judgement. You can either accept it and plan your mating strategy accordingly, or you can pout and have a wonderful time with a lot of cute bad boys until you get to 30 and the phone stops ringing.

If this man is as good as he seems (and dude has consummate Game — have to hand it to him. I’m saying High Beta, with the possibility of developing into a strong Wolf Alpha) then do as Susan says and stop at nothing to get him interested again. I think Susan’s suggestion is probably the lowest-hanging fruit. A polite, thoughtful, and well-mannered approach to the subject demonstrates that you are mature enough to handle a real relationship. Any other response might land you back in his bed, but it’s unlikely to land you in his life with any permanence.

This is your opportunity to grow up, step up, put on your big girl knickers and show him that you are really a woman, not a petulant child in a smokin-hot body. A man of quality will know the difference and act accordingly.

Good luck . . . and I mean that sincerely. If you’re serious, then consider acquiring some helpful wifely skills you can show off. No, really. bake the dude a pie or something.

Now, what you do with that pie, once you’ve made up, is entirely your business.

You’ve gotten a lot of advice here, and I hope you can dodge the barbs enough to take Susan’s insightful advice to heart. It sounds like you’ve got a winner, or at least the possibility of one. You are probably at the “hottest” you will ever be.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Ian Ironwood

+1 on the whole comment.

Society’s Disposable Son

@Maven3
You sir must have the patience of a saint. My last promising date was a few months ago, after date one the subsequent interactions were shit testy and gave an air of entitlement. I just fuckin ghosted…

pvw

@Susan: I think where I’m finding some empathy is in her having genuine feeling for him, but expressing it poorly. Pretending you don’t care for someone when you do is less objectionable than pretending you do care for someone when you don’t, IMO. … There is the rebound factor at work here, which suggests that she was not truly emotionally available when she met Stephen.

Me: Yes, I can understand you view; the other boyfriend pretended in a way which was so harmful thus she was on the rebound and not really available, which is what Stephen got caught up in. She saw herself as liking him but being guarded; he saw her as seeming to like him but being disrespectful at the same time, which meant in his view that she didn’t really like him at all.

LJ

@ Maven3 – I can’t tell what’s going on in that post, but is that an online communication with a woman in Serbia?

Given the differences in SES status between that situation and Anne’s, I don’t think we can really compare the 2, even if the age and attractiveness levels are the same. Meaning, the ability of a rich old guy in London to land beautiful young woman from Eastern Europe looking for money/citizenship doesn’t translate into his chances with woman in his own country.

Underdog

@Susan

“but I would go further and say they seek women with crazy behavior for the sexual and emotional roller coaster”

I call female projection on this one. Guys will always pursue the path of least resistance when it comes to sex. Men don’t spend billions on porn and prostitutes for the emotional roller coaster.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

I call female projection on this one. Guys will always pursue the path of least resistance when it comes to sex.

But they’re not impervious to getting played, falling for the wrong girl, etc. I have personally known various men who were clearly addicted to the drama. I’ve also known women who don’t do drama at all. There are undoubtedly more men on the “no drama” end of the spectrum and more women on the “constant drama” end, but there’s a whole lot of mixing in-between.

In fact, I’d go so far as to say that men who can get sex relatively easily were much more likely to make a high maintenance woman their gf. They’re looking for someone who can engage them on an emotional level, and the most emo women are the most likely to do that. I do believe this is often related to immaturity and decreases as guys mature through their 20s. Though I can say that I know several long-married couples where the woman is still psycho at 50. Her beauty faded but her personality didn’t change.

Cooper

I agree with Zach,

” I think this guy is into you and did want to date you, but he is a guy who has other options, and isn’t blinded by your beauty. He’s unwilling to put up with your disrespect just to be dating you. He acted almost exactly as I would have acted.”

Maven3

@LJ
In short:
– Krauser dates some girl while in Serbia (probably from daygame approach). Girl is sexually inexperienced (one guy before)
– he chats with her 3 months (Facebook), invites her to London, organizes tickets, visa, etc.
– her fcloses her once and next day says he used her for sex (aka: I dont love you anymore)
– he posts a video where he fucks her on his blog and rambles how great he is
– she writes him this message, Krauser posts again with comment “I rejected seconds” (more ramblings)

Sick, huh?
PUA are not saints – we lure and manipulate girls for sex.
I saw a lot, but this is ugly – this level of investment (3 months + tickets, etc) just to fuck once and have 5 minutes of ugly fame in niche blog?
IMO, he’s psychopath.

Ian

Beautiful women are human candy, the perfect object to be objectified. Higher-estrogen comes with a higher sex drive, higher emotionality, higher subjectivity. The prettiest girls in my town met the worst ends, and people still don’t pity them – because they’re the physical version of the 1%ers. Even now, at this low point, a part of me is tempted to address her directly with negs or false sympathy.

I agree that she misplayed a few things. Like people said, a beautiful woman can get shepherded into the short-term pile because of her excessive options. In the short-term, maybe the sex is so good that the woman gets addicted. If not, once the deed is done, much of the male imperative is already satisfied. Positive Reinforcement, Alex – especially on a man with options, as all of the men in her rung will be.

Other observations: One, Anna mentioned that she didn’t feel the relationship was yet “exclusive”, despite already having had sex. I’d tweak the timeline so that personal affection can develop before sex; she can afford to wait with her looks. Two, the high estrogen also makes women more susceptible to Game, and I wonder if she was as attracted before he pulled away.

yareallyhahaha

SO much fucking lol at this lololol

“Am I being completely crazy? Will this end right now if I don’t make a move? Or will I look pathetic? Or is it the case that if he likes me enough, I will hear from him? ”

She will be thinking about him 24/7. He doesn’t even have to take her out to dinner at this point. This “9” will fuck his brains out the next time they hang out. He turned down a little pussy now (on her turf, “come over, upset your sleep schedule, do what I want so I know you’re chasing me”) for a massive reward later (he can just txt “come over” any time day or night and she’ll come over because she’s dying to have a conversation with him, she’ll shit-test him a bit pouting and all that and he can just laugh it off, escalate, and she’ll bang him like crazy).

I don’t know if the guy ran Game on purpose, I doubt it, but this is hilarious to a PUA. This is exactly what we’re talking about when we tell guys to do shit like this guy did. She’s on an emotional rollercoaster right now that he’s the center of, and she loves every minute of it compared to some lame Nice Guy boyfriend who doesn’t push her through any emotions.

IN FACT, Game and PUA tactics work *SO WELL* that Susan herself, a complete anti-PUA chick-advice blogger, is actively ENCOURAGING this HB9 to “go crawling on him on your hands and knees” lolololol

Oh god, I love it.

“She is a hard 9, at least, if your taste runs to Kate Upton on a good day.”

I seem to recall mentioning that Game was made for the hottest girls.

What a day lol thanks for the laugh Sue. You guys who still aren’t sure about Game reading this site, come on over to the dark side, we have pussy. lol

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

What a day lol thanks for the laugh Sue. You guys who still aren’t sure about Game reading this site, come on over to the dark side, we have pussy. lol

This from a fat old PUA. He ain’t got no Annes.

Maven3

@yareallyhahaha
“I don’t know if the guy ran Game on purpose, I doubt it, but this is hilarious to a PUA. This is exactly what we’re talking about when we tell guys to do shit like this guy did. She’s on an emotional rollercoaster right now that he’s the center of, and she loves every minute of it compared to some lame Nice Guy boyfriend who doesn’t push her through any emotions.”

I will say on purpose 😀
Not so many guys (alpha, beta or PUA) can walk away from 9hb.

Underdog

@Susan

“In fact, I’d go so far as to say that men who can get sex relatively easily were much more likely to make a high maintenance woman their gf”

That’s because men who can get sex easily tend to know how to manage hot girls — and hot girls just happen to be emotional wrecks most of the time (coughAnnacough). Men are not attracted to drama in and of itself. If you line up a drama-queen hot girl with her drama-free equivalent, the guy will pick the drama-free version 100% of the time.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

If you line up a drama-queen hot girl with her drama-free equivalent, the guy will pick the drama-free version 100% of the time.

Perhaps, but that’s not the choice on offer. I have observed that many men of high SMV are with seriously crazy women. I don’t believe that most beautiful women are crazy, but even if you were right, it’s clear that a man would rather date a crazy 9 than a sweet and nurturing 8. Not to mention the crazy 7s I’ve seen with decent bf’s.

Zach

@yareally

Apparently on the dark side, you also have the writing abilities of a 10 year old lolololololololol

This guy’s “game” was literally having self-respect. There was no manipulation of any sort, no “negging”, none of that bullshit you idiots go on about. He just refused to be disrespected.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Zach

There was no manipulation of any sort, no “negging”, none of that bullshit you idiots go on about. He just refused to be disrespected.

Every blogger pimping PUA tactics is suffering from massive PTSD. Rollo and KrauserPUA have shared how devastated and broken they were by a woman earlier in life. Roosh has shared how thoroughly rejected he was by women until he went dark. Based on yareally’s description of his own appearance, I suspect his story is similar.

These guys are in a bad way, mentally.

Höllenhund

“Anne does not play hard to get. She is hard to get.”

No. Any woman is hard to get for some men and easy to get for others. All women play hard to get, but the SMV rank of the men that get played varies.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Hollenhund

The more beautiful the woman, the harder she is for any one man to win, due to mad competition. She has almost unlimited options. She does run the risk of being too selective, but that is not Anne’s problem.

Underdog

@Zach

Or he’s running some super tight dread game.

Erik L

I don’t think she is nuts but she needs to imagine how this looks from a man’s point of view. This is exactly how it would appear if she had lost interest in the guy but didn’t want to tell him bluntly (and who ever does?). He looked at the evidence and drew a reasonable conclusion. At this point it might be difficult to convince him of the opposite. If she follows up weakly, it might come off as guilt (maybe not the right word). That is, a way that she can lessen the feelings of having rejected a perfectly nice man. I know that doesn’t seem to make much sense but I would expect it.

Russ in Texas

@Susan#134

I think there’s some serious variation there. I married a hard 8 with a brain, no drama and a number of other great stuff in her hatband, though before making that jump I had bed access to a number of nines and one 10 (who I walked away from b/c she was boring).

I don’t know a whole lot about the game thing besides some reading lately over the past few months, but I think that men have some equivalent to the hypergamous thing in terms of a “beauty floor.” If I’m perfectly happy with an 8 or above, I don’t care about 8 vs 9 vs 10; once you’re in my radar, it’s other factors that’ll determine whether I’m willing to commit to you.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Russ

I think there’s some serious variation there. I married a hard 8 with a brain, no drama and a number of other great stuff in her hatband, though before making that jump I had bed access to a number of nines and one 10 (who I walked away from b/c she was boring).

Yes, I’m sure there is. Well done, btw.

HanSolo

Can people please learn to read? As stated in the opening paragraph of her email to Susan, the guy is clearly 25!!!!!! He is NOT 35. Definitely not Krauser.

Escoffier

“it’s clear that a man would rather date a crazy 9 than a sweet and nurturing 8″

Not necessarily. For some men, perhaps, this is always true. For others, it is never true. And for some us, one experience with a crazy HB is enough to make us say “never again” and seek sanity even if it means trading in a couple of SMV points.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Not necessarily. For some men, perhaps, this is always true. For others, it is never true. And for some us, one experience with a crazy HB is enough to make us say “never again” and seek sanity even if it means trading in a couple of SMV points.

Good point, I shouldn’t have spoken so generally. This obviously varies quite a bit from man to man. It’s an interesting analogy to cads, perhaps – a lot of women who get burned by a cad as freshmen say “never again”

Underdog

@Susan

“it’s clear that a man would rather date a crazy 9 than a sweet and nurturing 8.”

Sure, if by date you mean sex for a few months with no plans of further commitment. A man who can get sex easily (aka has game and thus can handle the craziness) would definitely “date” a crazy 9 over a nurturing 8.

“Not to mention the crazy 7s I’ve seen with decent bf’s.”

Decent as in high SMV and has plenty of options? Or decent as in nice/beta and lacks options? Because if there’s anything to learn from this post, it’s that high SMV men will almost never put up with dramas when it comes to LTRs.

Höllenhund

“These guys are in a bad way, mentally.”

It’s time you considered blogging for Jezebel.com.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

“These guys are in a bad way, mentally.”

It’s time you considered blogging for Jezebel.com.

LOL! Actually, HH, you might consider counseling yourself.

Ian

Good point! We should add a red flag – any man who says is ex (or heaven forbid, his exes) were crazy, psycho or insane should be summarily dismissed! I think a lot of these men get hooked on the dopamine rush of conflict and agitation followed by makeup sex. They learn to crave the unpredictability and find it genuinely arousing. Guys here have said the men put up with crazy behavior for the sex, but I would go further and say they seek women with crazy behavior for the sexual and emotional roller coaster.

I’m triply red-flagged then.

Speaking in defense of Drama-lover-lovers: if we can picture testosterone poisoning as an over-aggressive, deep-voiced, low-vocabulary, handsome young man, then estrogen poisoning is a pretty, nurturing, high-voiced, periodically insane, young woman. Dealing with periodic insanity is often the cost of dating young and pretty.

There’s definitely a sexual component, but, in sexual relationships, that’s a given. Makeup sex isn’t the main draw – there’s a carnality in the craziness itself. Craziness and lust are both low-brain storms of emotionality, there’s cross-over between the two. In my experience, everyday sex has been much better with the dramatic women.

And now, for my attempt at rhetoric. Emotionality is insanity. Women tend to be emotional. Some women more emotional than others. Are they all so unworthy of affection? We, crazy-lovers, accept a woman’s inherent emotionality. We may correct, do not punish, a woman for it. If we must ourselves be punished and red-flagged by the less-emotional women of the world, that is a burden we must accept, in our noble pursuit, of love.

– Dedicated to S., S., D., & S..

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Ian

There’s definitely a sexual component, but, in sexual relationships, that’s a given. Makeup sex isn’t the main draw – there’s a carnality in the craziness itself. Craziness and lust are both low-brain storms of emotionality, there’s cross-over between the two. In my experience, everyday sex has been much better with the dramatic women.

Thanks for owning it, and for helping me to understand what I’ve witnessed with my own eyes.

We, crazy-lovers, accept a woman’s inherent emotionality. We may correct, do not punish, a woman for it. If we must ourselves be punished and red-flagged by the less-emotional women of the world, that is a burden we must accept, in our noble pursuit, of love.

Touche! Seriously, you raise an important point – it’s all about the match. I’ve mentioned that I know several long-standing marriages where the woman is crazy. My own mother was literally crazy, and despite all the ups and downs of my parents’ marriage, I know for a fact that their attraction to each other never wavered. Their marriage outlasted many more predictable and boring ones.

Höllenhund

“The more beautiful the woman, the harder she is for any one man to win, due to mad competition.”

It’s due to hypergamy. Women of varying SMV are competed for by men of varying SMV. A female 10 doesn’t have to “put up” with advances by men that are 8-9 or below because they generally don’t bother to try. It’s not like a mini-army is pursuing every hot woman. That’s nothing but a myth.

“She has almost unlimited options.”

…for casual sex. For commitment from the men she wants it from, not so much.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

“She has almost unlimited options.”

…for casual sex. For commitment from the men she wants it from, not so much.

Her position in this SMP is weaker than it used to be, it’s true. But a 9 is going to have more offers for every kind of male attention than a less attractive woman is, including commitment. Most of them have literally dozens of orbiters.

LJ

“It’s not like a mini-army is pursuing every hot woman. That’s nothing but a myth. “

Thanks for that link to Jon Millward. Very interesting. Re the army of men pursuing beautiful women, I’ve discussed this with young women who are considered “the hottest” by guys. My sample is decidedly non-slutty. Here is what they report.

1. Lots of unsolicited and unwelcome attention from afar. Cat calls, cars slowing down, uncomfortable staring in public.
2. Lots of supplicating attention up close – free stuff, offers of favors, etc. in hopes of getting a number.
3. Lots of approaches from extremely cocky men who have zero interest in anything but the hot bod.
4. Frequent feedback that guys they liked didn’t feel like they had a real shot.
5. Frequent conflict in relationships due to male insecurity. This is often fed by other males – they are the ones to say “you could do a lot better.” Women have reported that they get this a lot from strangers when they are with their boyfriends! Needless to say, this creates anxiety in the bf, never a good feeling.

A beautiful woman has to filter out cads she finds attractive, while filtering in good guys she finds attractive, often without much information about which is which!

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Rollo

.,come on over to the dark side, we have pussy. lol

Winner.

Thread closed.

Dude, your asshole game doesn’t work around here. You come off as a putz.

Lokland

@Susan

“Every blogger pimping PUA tactics is suffering from massive PTSD. Rollo and KrauserPUA have shared how devastated and broken they were by a woman earlier in life. Roosh has shared how thoroughly rejected he was by women until he went dark. Based on yareally’s description of his own appearance, I suspect his story is similar.

These guys are in a bad way, mentally.”

OT, but can anyone blame them?
If the system is built to inflict pain is the expected result not going to be some individuals breaking?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

OT, but can anyone blame them?
If the system is built to inflict pain is the expected result not going to be some individuals breaking?

I don’t blame them for being a mess, but I caution others not to take their advice. It is never free and clear, it is always tainted with their own pain and anger.

Lokland

“Good point! We should add a red flag – any man who says is ex (or heaven forbid, his exes) were crazy, psycho or insane should be summarily dismissed! ”
Always interesting to see the tables turn.

You fucked one alpha, your no good for an LTR.
Crazy rant (from women here) about how unrealistic the man is.

You dated on crazy chick, your no good for an LTR.
…..

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

You fucked one alpha, your no good for an LTR.
Crazy rant (from women here) about how unrealistic the man is.

You dated on crazy chick, your no good for an LTR.

Just keeping things fair.

Höllenhund

“If the system is built to inflict pain is the expected result not going to be some individuals breaking?”

It’s designed to inflict pain on men, but those who break are the ones who get cuckolded, divorce-raped, falsely charged with rape, bled through chilimony. As far as them are concerned, the system has served its purpose. If they also remain plugged in, its victory is complete. But if you refuse to become a victim and plug yourself out, you don’t break; you win.

Russ in Texas

@Susan#161:

The general run of pretty women won’t consider those orbiters dating/sexual material, however, simply because they orbit: they fail what I call the “daddy test.”* What beautiful women often *fail* to consider is that men they consider “in their league,” simply by that definition, are not impressed. A man who dates 5s and 6s gets starstruck by an 8 or 9. A man who dates 8-10 *might* orbit a 10 if the whole package were there. But a 9, even a hard/solid one? No way.

I’ve caught a lot of flak for saying “beautiful women are a dime a dozen” from guys for whom that apparently sounds like crazy-talk. But for me and a lot of other men it is very much the case.

I think that men have some equivalent to the hypergamous thing in terms of a “beauty floor.” If I’m perfectly happy with an 8 or above, I don’t care about 8 vs 9 vs 10; once you’re in my radar, it’s other factors that’ll determine whether I’m willing to commit to you.

I agree that once the woman is above the threshold or beauty floor that then the relative beauty beyond that level are less important than personality, character, etc.

I will disagree with your use of hypergamy her somewhat.

The key point about hypergamy is setting the minimum bar at a level higher than your own (and I fully admit that all these rating systems are somewhat vague and hard to define exactly but they still get the point across in a general way).

So a woman (or a man) who is a 6 and will only accept 7+ men (women) is being hypergamous whereas just wanting someone better than yourself is not getting at the most important factor of hypergamy.

In the present day, I think there are more men willing to accept someone at his level than women are. And that makes perfect sense. The provider/protector value than men used to be able to throw into their overall value no longer adds as much because women don’t need that as much from an individual man because technology made physical strength less important (machines do most of the heavy work now and guns remove much of the differential ability to kill, plus add in the relatively safe society we live in). Without needing a provider/protector as much then women are free to focus more on pursuing pushing their attraction buttons that in prehistoric times corresponded to better genes (though how closely they correlate today is dubious because some of them can be faked such as confidence and badboyedness because there is not a close examination of whether there is substance behind the bluster like there would have been in the tribal setting).

Höllenhund

I suppose you’re schooled in world history, so I won’t have to explain that Soviet propagandists used a simple method to deal with opponents: they neutralized their subversive message by giving them a label that wasn’t open to interpretation i.e. “mentally ill”.

Unlike in earlier times, the Soviet cangaroo courts didn’t even bother to sentence them without evidence or due process; it was no longer necessary. They simple rounded up their political opponents, “diagnosed” them with mental illness and locked them away for “psychiatric treatment”.

Jezebel, being the ideological bastard child of Marxism-Leninism, has copied these methods, of course, the main difference being that the federal government they’re allied with has not yet fully implemented it. But it’s only a matter of time. And now you’re resorting to the same method yourself. That’s pretty clear.

Can you offer a counterargument or you’ll just keep dishing out snark?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Hollenhund

I don’t need to argue the point about mental illness. We have Rollo on this thread championing Dark Triad males and the “dark side.” Those personality traits are listed as mentally disordered in the DSM for mental health professionals. In addition, scores of studies on narcissism, Machiavellianism and sociopathy highlight the way in which these “agentic” individuals operate, freely exploiting others without remorse. They score highly on disagreeableness, low on conscientiousness and extremely low on empathy. They can’t maintain LTRs, they rely on a quick in-and-out (or P&D) strategy. They don’t connect with other human beings in a meaningful way.

HanSolo

@Susan Walsh

“The more beautiful the woman, the harder she is for any one man to win, due to mad competition. She has almost unlimited options.”

That’s why I have little sympathy for female 9’s and 10’s who are with assholes. They could pick almost any guy and yet she picked him? The asshole?

I do, however, sympathize or empathize with female 9’s and 10’s who would like to have a commited, faithful relationship with a 9 or 10 value guy but half of those guys are players not looking for an LTR. This is the same dynamic that the male 4-6’s experience where probably 1/4 or 1/2 of the female 4-6’s are wanting the male 5-7’s (or higher) and both of these things totally throws off the assortive mating balance.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@HanSolo

That’s why I have little sympathy for female 9′s and 10′s who are with assholes. They could pick almost any guy and yet she picked him? The asshole?

I do, however, sympathize or empathize with female 9′s and 10′s who would like to have a commited, faithful relationship with a 9 or 10 value guy but half of those guys are players not looking for an LTR.

+1 My point exactly.

Höllenhund

“But a 9 is going to have more offers for every kind of male attention than a less attractive woman is, including commitment. Most of them have literally dozens of orbiters.”

She has desire for neither her orbiters nor for the majority of her approachers. In that she’s in the same shoes as a 6 or a 8. The only difference is that the orbiters of a female 8 are 6s and below whereas the orbiters of a female 10 are 8s and below.

pvw

Ian at 133: Other observations: One, Anna mentioned that she didn’t feel the relationship was yet “exclusive”, despite already having had sex. I’d tweak the timeline so that personal affection can develop before sex; she can afford to wait with her looks. Two, the high estrogen also makes women more susceptible to Game, and I wonder if she was as attracted before he pulled away.

Me: I was thinking about this. She was going into a sexual relationship from a position in which she felt conflicted; she was attracted and liked him but was distrustful. So she couldn’t respect him in the way he deserved. Not a good combination; it’s not exclusive, so she feels ready to bail at a moment’s notice, or isn’t in too deep in case he wants to. And the funny part, a more aware and self assured woman would not be having sex before knowing things were exclusive and wouldn’t be having sex without certainty about him. But it occurred to me that is the nature of today’s sexual marketplace. Too many women believe if they want to stay in the game and keep a guy’s attention, they have to put out and early. You’re right, but it takes a mature grown and self aware woman to say that the current traditional model isn’t working and that she needs to remove herself from it.

Russ in Texas

@LJ#155.

Saw that a bit ago.
It probably makes things even worse than the investigator intended, given that his top slots are inhabited by low 7s. One assumes that had he put actually beautiful women into those positions, that they’d have received many, MANY more responses.

Höllenhund

“Those personality traits are listed as mentally disordered in the DSM for mental health professionals.”

And the colleagues of those professionals tell us that the same traits improve one’s chances in the sexual marketplace due to women’s preferences being what they are, which is the same thing the “mentally ill” “PUAs” are saying. So yes, you should indeed argue the point, because “he’s mentally ill” isn’t a counterargument, it’s a tactic in the Marxist culture war.

Russ in Texas

@HanSolo#164.

You’re right; I was hunting for an equivalent and misused the term in the process. Some “over the station” happens, though, thus my fumbling for terms. You could have some stinking hound who couldn’t actually pull a 6 if his life depended on it, but won’t look at anybody less than an 8. I was roomies once with a guy like that; it was fairly insane (classic omega behavior on rejection, too).

yareallyhahaha

@Susan
“They can’t maintain LTRs, they rely on a quick in-and-out (or P&D) strategy. They don’t connect with other human beings in a meaningful way.”

shit, my LTR GF of 2 years and her family will be very puzzled to hear that.

You can keep making stuff up and using clincial sounding terminology to try to make your made up accusations carry more weight, but in reality it just doesn’t stick.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Had to delete yareally. If he would stick to debating the point at hand and not proselytize his wasted lifestyle, I’d let it stand. But no way is HUS going to be a springboard for that shit.

It’s actually moronic that this post about Anne’s relationship is even generating discussion about PUAs. Thanks to Rollo for highjacking the thread by mentioning Kreepy Krauser.

Rollo, Yareallypua and Hollenhund in one thread. How many brain cells have been sacrificed? How many readers have fled the bizarro comments of these middle aged prurient men?

LJ

@ Russ – Interesting you would classify them as 7’s. I’m just a straight woman, but I’d wager the 2 “most attractive” of the women profiles are more attractive than ~90% of okcupid users their age., or women in real life their age. Although it’s not easy to tell given the small thumbnail pics.

But they probably wanted to show the experience for the “typical” beautiful woman that might actually use OkC, rather than just put up a pic of Mila Kunis that would be generalizable to no one.

HanSolo

@Russ in Texas

I agree that some guys are hypergamous. I just think more women are and it makes sense in terms of evolutionary psych.

@Yareally

I wasn’t doubting that some assholes push her attraction buttons and don’t pedalize her and she likes that.

Rather, I was looking at it from her point of view. I don’t think the world is as dichotomous or bimodal as you may be suggesting. Many of the male 9 and 10’s are neither assholes nor weak supplicators so why doesn’t she go for one of them? Well, because she excessively loves the feeling of “a guy must be better than me if he doesn’t treat me well” (obviously she’s never going to give the 5 the time of day to begin with so he can act disinterested all he wants and it won’t matter).

Also, I’m not doubting the effectiveness of game with many/most women, at least done in the right way.

I’m simply asking, why doesn’t she go for someone that is better for her? Reason? She wants to feel infatuated and more often than not the asshole makes her feel that (especially with younger, less mature girls, though some older women never change too).

Russ in Texas

“Then an asshole comes along and says “No, fuck you, you’re being retarded right now.” and she goes “holy shit, someone who I can trust to say what they REALLY think around me!!” ”

aka, passes her Daddy Test.
Yup. While I think some of the folks in game-land have a weirdly jaundiced view of popular sociology, resulting in a worldview that seems to abhor the feminine entirely, YaReally is dead on the money here.

Russ in Texas

@LJ#180,

We could run a quick poll, and that might actually be very interesting.
But it’s equally likely that I’m simply picky. I found the three women who received the top # of responses to be reasonably close to each other at high-5/7/7, and wouldn’t have been attracted to the others in the slightest.

(I *did* once date a 4, a classic “homely” butterface you couldn’t have made pretty with all the photoshop in the world – primarily because she actually fulfilled the ancient stereotype of ‘what a personality.’ Irony is, while all these folks say the pretty girls have the highest SMV…..me and Mrs. Butterface had a LOT of sex and if she hadn’t had some very specific damage/issues to which I’m allergic, there’s a decent chance she could have landed me for real. Me and the wifey are still in touch with her two decades later.)

LJ

Interesting, but I would say you seem to be in the minority in seeing the girl w/ glasses as close to the attractiveness levels of the 2 women to the right of them, given the ~10: 1 ratio of messages they received.

Sai

@HanSolo
“That’s why I have little sympathy for female 9’s and 10’s who are with assholes. They could pick almost any guy and yet she picked him? The asshole?”
INORITE

“the hero meets the villain and they have a massive life or death struggle and you’re falling off the edge of your seat pulling your hair out with anticipation and excitement and BOOM!!! The hero wins!! The day is saved!! Everyone celebrates”
Hang on, this sounds more like action than drama. Now it’s true, I will watch Die Hard and Conan the Barbarian over and over, but if there’s no action I’ll do like Samuel L. Jackson says and go the &%$# to sleep, because I just don’t care.

Jason773

Susan,

5. Frequent conflict in relationships due to male insecurity. This is often fed by other males – they are the ones to say “you could do a lot better.” Women have reported that they get this a lot from strangers when they are with their boyfriends! Needless to say, this creates anxiety in the bf, never a good feeling.

This right here is absolutely brutal unless the guy has rock solid inner game or is undoubtedly an SMV match to the 8-10. Multiple times over the years I’ve been out with an attractive girl and when I’m getting drinks for us or something a guy will take a shot at the girl I am with who looks to be alone. I’ve even overheard conversations as they go something like this…

Guy: Hey, why are you over here by yourself?

Girl: I’m not. I’m with someone.

Guy: Oh yea? Who?

Girl: Him (points to me)

Guy: Oh, he’s pretty good. Lucky guy though, have a good night.

This has only worked in my favor purely because of looks and musculature, but without that I can only imagine the damage that would occur to the psyche. If a guy is an overall 8-10, but not an 8-10 physically, this situation happens a ton and other guys will try to blow him out. I see it all the time and the worst women are the ones that feed into it. These beautiful girls need to reassure the guys every now and then if they want to maintain the peace.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Jason

If a guy is an overall 8-10, but not an 8-10 physically, this situation happens a ton and other guys will try to blow him out. I see it all the time and the worst women are the ones that feed into it. These beautiful girls need to reassure the guys every now and then if they want to maintain the peace.

I know of one relationship where this was such a problem it eventually failed. The girl is a 8-9, the guy is a 6 at best. She fell hard for him, though, and was careful not to flirt or even acknowledge other guys. It didn’t matter, everywhere they went, guys remarked on it. Sometimes they’d ask him, “Who is that?” When he said, “My girlfriend” they said, “Yeah, right.” Another time she and her bf were having a disagreement about something outside on the sidewalk, and a guy walked up to her and said, “You are so hot, it is ridiculous that you put up with any shit from this loser.” It was truly doomed, and no amount of reassurance helped. Her bf would wind up yelling, “I don’t give a fuck!” In the end, he told her that he wished it didn’t bother him, but it did, and he couldn’t do it anymore. He actually broke her heart.

Ian

@Rollo

Sue, for the record it wouldn’t be all that difficult to build the case that HUS is little more than your own catharsis for reliving the life you wished you’d lived for the past 28 years vicariously through attractive 22 year old women.

Glass houses and all that,..

This is passive aggressive and faux-intellectual, I’ve lost the tingle you hoped to gain through your earlier wise-ass asides. Build the case directly that Susan is living her preferred life vicariously through her coaching of 22-year olds, without the “would be”.

I don’t know you, but I sense vaguly that you’re in the pickup scene. There’s a recurring with PUA’s that they try to become what they learn women find attractive. Problem, what works in a bar with women doesn’t work with the men who are unlike women.

In many places, humility is learned through pain. Men don’t speak sharply because even weak punches hurt, and teach humility and respect. In the military, in manlier countries, in Susan’s hometown and mine, men have to do more to earn respect than affect a sexy persona.

@yarighthaha

lol “That guy won the lottery and fell ass-backwards into money? That’s okay, what an awesome guy! That other guy started up a business and strategically built up and earned his money methodically and on purpose?? WHAT AN ASSHOLE!!!!! Everyone should just cross their fingers and hope money falls from the sky!!”

If this was my site, I would ban you permanently for the crime of using “lol” nine times in one post. Add the emoticon, capitalizations, multiple exclamation points, and that post was mental graffiti. Please leave, or at least leave the teenage-girl prose some place where I won’t read it.

Russ in Texas

@LJ.

Author: LJ
Comment:
Interesting, but I would say you seem to be in the minority in seeing the girl w/ glasses as close to the attractiveness levels of the 2 women to the right of them, given the ~10: 1 ratio of messages they received.

Yup. That’s the advantage of experience. #3 is backlit with a crappy camera — it’s a photo tailor-made to make her look like crap. Dollar to a donut in real life she’s prettier. The other two are shot with good lighting and decent camaras, and are making them look BETTER than they do IRL.

The hard-8 I married looked no better than the #2 or #3 recipient here until she got out from under a pair of birth-control-glasses and me and her Dad got her to stop dressing frumpy.

Underdog

If there’s anything that game deniers should learn from this post, it’s that dread game — much like every other PUA technique, including negging — is simply something that high SMV men naturally do.

You can ridicule the nerds who broke those actions down and applied PUA terminologies to them, but what you can’t deny is that those actions work. Shaming PUA tactics as “manipulation” is simply feminine talk since women want “natural alphas” instead of “learned alphas”.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Underdog

There was no dread Game here, as it was not Stephen’s intent to provoke anxiety, as far as I know. I believe, as I said in the post, that he simply concluded she didn’t like him much and moved on. Dread Game involves all kinds of fakery – calling your gf while getting other women to laugh loudly in the background, that sort of thing. And it usually aims to get the woman jealous of your other options, which are generally manufactured for the purpose. Stephen didn’t engage in manipulative tactics at all.

A Definite Beta Guy

Yeah, I know rollo and yareally are basically Dark Triad Males and are getting a lot of well-deserved hate, but they basically got it nailed.

Let’s look at this from the guy’s POV, IF HE WERE A PLAYER.

Dating a 9, she puts out in less than a month. Doesn’t even need commitment, so he’s free to hook up with other girls, which I’m 100% sure he’s able to do. Girl leaves on vacation (hell, that just made picking up other girls easier!), comes back and offers a booty call.
He says no, girl responds crazily, but is so twisted up and thinking about him all the time that she is asking the internet for assistance. Willing to bet dollars to donuts that if he called asking for another late night drink (read: Booty Call), Anne would jump at the offer.

This isn’t a horrible situation for the guy at all, and if he is a player, this is going right into his hands.

Anne’s problem, IMO, is not one of strategy, it’s one insecurity and immaturity. That’s why she can sleep with a man she barely knows but not make him a cup of coffee. Sorry, Anne, I don’t mean to offend you, I wasn’t really mature enough for a relationship at 22 either. Neither was Hope, from what she is saying.

It might work out with this guy, it might not, but you’re not quite ready for another relationship yet. You’re obviously still hurt from the last one, you’re not fully matured yet, and you are very vulnerable because of that. That will, more times than not, result in you getting hurt.

And the more you get hurt, well….

I would actually take a break from the whole dating scene period. Recharge your batteries, come back in a year, and see what lemonade you can make of the lemons that life gives you

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Let’s look at this from the guy’s POV, IF HE WERE A PLAYER.

But he’s not a player and he doesn’t run Game. He’s just a man behaving intelligently as he honestly weighs his options. Anne gave him little to go on, flaked and acted bitchy, so he moved on. No tactics.

Just1Z

@YaReallyHaHa…
“Which movie that I just described would YOU want to publish if you were a movie studio?”

But seriously, here you have a textbook example of (by your scale) an exceptionally attractive 22 year old woman who WAS attracted to a guy displaying Alpha dominance via his indifference to her –something she’s unaccustomed to as a high SMV girl.

And, as Game would predict, she’s locked into qualifying for his intimate acceptance. In fact you yourself want to characterize the guy as a hopeful LTR potential. How do you not see the irony in that?

Ever heard of a theorem, its converse and contrapositive ? It’s the done thing in mathematics. Here is how it works :

A theorem is in the form of : If (something) then (something else).

So what is the converse then ? Well, you switch those two brackets around. And then it looks like this :

If (something else) then (something).

And here is the funny thing Rollo; the converse of a theorem is not always true. I’ll explain later. Just keep this in mind.

So what is the contrapositive then ? Well, you take the converse and you add a “not” to each bracket. So the contrapositive looks like this:

If “not” (something else) then “not” (something).

Easy isn’t it ? And here’s the rub: The converse of any theorem is ALWAYS true. In fact, some theorems can only be proven by making use of the contrapositive.

So what is a real life example then ?

Theorem : If someone is a lawyer then he is a bastard.

Converse : If someone is a bastard then he is a lawyer.

Do you see how they were switched around Rollo ? And like I said, the converse of a theorem is not always true. So why is that ?

It’s because some bastards are politicians …

Contrapositive : If someone is “not”a bastard then he is “not”a lawyer.

Always true, don’t you think Rollo ?

So let’s apply this to what you’re needling Suzan about :

Theorem : If someone is a PUA then he has Game. (True)

Converse : If someone has Game then he is a PUA.

Eh ? I’m not buying this. I think ole Steven could be an exception. There will be others … after all, Rollo, I need only one counterexample to disprove the converse.

So this is not an “irony” Rollo … it’s a failed converse … hence, it’s a case of railing against the player … and not the Game.

But at least you, and Suzan, will agree on the contrapositive :

If someone does not have Game, then that someone is not a PUA.

Heh.

Another thing that struck me about you and Suzan, is by analogy of boxing :

And your style of writing (and debating) Rollo, will not have any effect on her. If you’re a Foreman ( with such powerful punches : Foreman destroyed Frazier, where Ali had his work cut out for him), then by heavens, Suzan is your Ali.

She’s rope-a-doping you.

It’s also why deti is having trouble with Suzan, but to give him credit, he’s more like Joe Frazier. He has heart.

And now you’re thinking what kind of a woman can bring me to my knees Rollo ?

Great, you can get laid. Big deal. That’s what I find so pathetic about guys like you, Rollo, etc. Once you’ve had enough sex, it’s not really all that important anymore. You think that because you’ve built your life around getting laid all the time, that that’s what everyone else wants. It’s probably because you never merited a look from a girl for so long that you’re massively overcompensating for the insecure little boy (lol) inside of you. I’ve turned down sex plenty of times before. It’s not the be-all and end-all of life. Although since you do sound like you’re in high school, so maybe you do think that. Guys learning how to get better at talking to women? Fine, all for it. Guys who determine their entire self-worth on the ability to get women into bed? Pathetic. Grow up. I have to run to something that doesn’t involve chasing pussy, or else I’d continue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

Han: “I do, however, sympathize or empathize with female 9′s and 10′s who would like to have a commited, faithful relationship with a 9 or 10 value guy but half of those guys are players not looking for an LTR.”

Why? I won’t feel sympathy for women who won’t extend the same sympathy to men. Not specifically, and definitely not generically.

If there’s no quarter for deltas and gammas other than laugh at him at wordt, and say “man up” a best – then it’s the same for women. I make exceptions for those who go out and seem kind to those less fortunate (like Jackie).

Sympathy for people way above me, be it by wealth or looks, is in near-zero supply.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Sympathy for people way above me, be it by wealth or looks, is in near-zero supply.

Really? I have no problem sympathizing with people both better looking and better off than myself. Neither of those things guarantees happiness or contentment. I feel very sorry for some of the best looking, wealthiest people I know.

Senior Beta

Yo,Susan @96. Didn’t mean to ruffle feathers. We agree Krauser not the guy. The guy stills sounds like he absorbed some Roissy lessons – if the gal is being coy and flighly, move on. We take your word for it she is a 9 and can get the top 1%. But, just like you said, we all know the guys in the top 1% have lots of action. And she probably missed her chance to nail the guy down. She will undoubtedly snare some rich guy. Why fret over a 9’s problems when you have many more 6-7 fishes to fry?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Senior Beta

Why fret over a 9′s problems when you have many more 6-7 fishes to fry?

As I said earlier, I found her email interesting. It’s not every day I get an email from Sandro Botticelli’s Venus. I’ve written before about the plight of female 9s and 10s in this SMP. Beautiful people need love too!

There a lot of envy, a lot of schadenfreude, a lot of smallness as people celebrate the misery of someone more fortunate than themselves. I don’t relate to that.

I find Anne’s case interesting based on the male-female dynamics alone, and I saw the potential to provide Anne with a reality check, which she badly needed.

Underdog

@Zach

You know you’re on a site called Hooking Up Smart, right?

Why are you so obsessed with sex, bro?

Russ in Texas

Long-term relationship potential?

Easy test for women: how do you feel about washing his socks?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Russ

Easy test for women: how do you feel about washing his socks?

Oof, you’re a week too late on that one.

Society’s Disposable Son

“A guy who spends his life obsessing over mastering guitar and playing in a rock band to get more attention from women is a loser.”

But this is precisely the reason we have shitty ass bands like nickelback and buck cherry… how about learning for the sake of creating good music and pushing yourself to be the best despite what anyone else thinks?

I don’t see many jazz, classical or extreme metal musicians neck deep in trim but these types all have incredible musical abilities.

Starting a nickelback cover band to bang chicks IS pretty lame.

http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

Russ in Texas “Easy test for women: how do you feel about washing his socks?”

Did it just today, sorted, folded and put away, as always.

But we went over this in a different conversation. Men don’t fall in love with women who clean for them because of the cleaning. They fall in love with the fun and sexy aspects first and then evaluate long-term potential.

pjay

I sense Teh Crazy….run, Man, RUN!!!!!!

Emily

I’m so confused by this sudden PUA takeover. …surely there’s a happy medium between sycophant and pickup artist? My impression is that Anna’s guy is just a decent dude who has self-respect. This isn’t “dread game”, it’s basic dignity.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

I’m so confused by this sudden PUA takeover. …surely there’s a happy medium between sycophant and pickup artist? My impression is that Anna’s guy is just a decent dude who has self-respect. This isn’t “dread game”, it’s basic dignity.

It’s a hostile takeover. They’re about as welcome as ebola virus.

Russ in Texas

A willingness to wash socks is, however, an unambiguous statement regarding long-term potential.

The flip side of that, though, and why I posted it, is Anne or another gal in her shoes responses with a vocal-fried “OMG, No,” then she’s just answered the LTR question for herself unambiguously.

Russ in Texas

Emily, I agree on the happy medium. Some of those guys have a very “out there” sense of how society works.

What the PUA guys did, and doing so was actually a service to the rest of us at large, was observe and describe the things that successful men did, and analyze for why. In that sense “Game” can loosely be translated to “understands intersex relations,” and anybody can benefit.

Senior Beta

Actually, Rollo is being modest. Several of us who like his writing and ideas refer to him as the Plato of Pussy.

Previously, it would have been an insult to call you someone who would argue under false premises, in a post about false-premises. Knowing that, find the exact words “low self-esteem bar skanks”. If you can’t, take a moment to observe the human nature of what that implies.

As a fellow observer of human nature, and a smarter one, let me share an anecdote with you. Susan’s hometown has a bit of a Martial tradition. I have observed quiet, medium-height, slender men from that town, with fighting experience, wall up shoulder-to-shoulder, four-across, and knock the false confidence off of a group of 20 men, from a more effete, pleasure-loving culture.

Though the four men were neither cocky, nor funny, nor had they received internet-based training in remedial manliness, they managed to date and sleep with the most highly-attractive women in their combined social circles, drawing mainly from the effete men’s neighborhoods. Because they carried themselves with respect, I respected them.

Having that knowledge, were you to meet Susan, among her cousins on the street, would you dare to derisively call her Aunt Sue? If you would not, for fear, I do not respect you. If you would, I still would not respect you. Even if you win the fight, you’d deserve to lose.

If you cannot gain my respect, you are not an alpha. You are acting the part of an alpha, for sex, and a woman who falls under your spell, for sex with an alpha, is being lied to. No one with confidence studies to achieve the appearance of it. In your language, affected cockiness is a DLV, however many insecure and immature young women, many of whom frequent bars, it dupes.

pvw

@A Definite Beta Guy #194: “Anne’s problem, IMO, is not one of strategy, it’s one insecurity and immaturity…”

Me: We are seeing the world of combat dating at work. Women are at a distinct disadvantage: see BB’s post #103.

Emily

Re: The sock test

How hard is it to wash socks? Any rogue socks that end up on my floor get thrown in the laundry with the rest of my clothes and then eventually make their way back to my boyfriend’s house. My bf does the same thing with any of my clothes that are left at his place.

Ian

Actually, Rollo is being modest. Several of us who like his writing and ideas refer to him as the Plato of Pussy.

I hear that this type of joyous fraternal affection was more common during Plato’s time.

Really, I haven’t browsed in a few weeks. What’s bringing in all the bronies, and how long have they been here?

yareallyhahaha

@Emily
“This isn’t “dread game”, it’s basic dignity.”

What you’re saying is “I know that car is moving but it has nothing to do with physics, it’s just driving a car.”

All we’re doing is labelling very obvious consistent human psychology that naturally exists. You move your body up off the ground and back down again, and I label that a “jump” and help other people learn how to purposely use their leg muscles to create a “jump”.

I don’t like to wash my OWN socks. I’m terrified to learn what that means lol

“In that sense “Game” can loosely be translated to “understands intersex relations,” and anybody can benefit.”

The question there then, is why are we demonized for being extremely competent at understanding something and using that understanding to achieve a goal? Nobody cries out when someone studies to be good at Chess, or at being a Doctor. And in fact, when done properly and used in the recommended manner (“leave them better than you found them”), the end result is two satisfied people who have fond memories of fun orgasms together. The girls I’ve been with have nothing but good things to say about me and our time together because part of PUA is understanding the psychology of how to make sure a woman feels good about hooking up instead of feeling shameful/slutty. The only sad emotions some of them feel is that I won’t be their boyfriend, but I was honest and up-front with them about not being able to provide that from the very start.

@Ian
“I have observed quiet, medium-height, slender men from that town, with fighting experience”

Oh is this going to be one of those things where you threaten someone over the Internet, not directly, but by heavily implying that “Bad Things”(TM) will happen to anyone who does something you disapprove of? I liked when Clint Eastwood did the whole “You ever meet someone you shouldn’t have messed with?” bit in that “GET OFF MY LAWN” movie too lol

For what it’s worth, I’ve picked up girls in biker bars and cowboy bars and angry little small towns with”good ol’ small town values” and shit. Those guys aren’t real difficult to befriend, and you just game their girls a little more subtly than in the big city type places.

The question there then, is why are we demonized for being extremely competent at understanding something and using that understanding to achieve a goal? Nobody cries out when someone studies to be good at Chess, or at being a Doctor.

I cannot believe you just compared being a PUA to being a doctor. lololololoolololzzzzz

Being a productive member of society and living a life of purpose can take many forms. Here are some pastimes that do not make the grade:

@Ian
“What’s bringing in all the bronies, and how long have they been here?”

Righteous vindication in this article where Sue instructs an HB9 to throw herself begging at a guy running Dread Game.

Well played on the Bronies thing. Sorry if we disrupted the love fest by pointing out reality.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Righteous vindication in this article where Sue instructs an HB9 to throw herself begging at a guy running Dread Game.

The interpretation of Stephen’s behavior as running Dread Game is silly. Go read Roissy’s post on Dread Game. Stephen is batting zero on his list of tactics. Dread Game is about manipulating someone into believing – falsely – that you have other women who want you. This misapplication of a Game principle leaves me no choice but to conclude that yareally pua and Rollo are stupid. No surprise in the first case, I’m a bit surprised in the second.

pvw

@ Senior Beta # 201

Yo,Susan @96. Didn’t mean to ruffle feathers. We agree Krauser not the guy. The guy stills sounds like he absorbed some Roissy lessons – if the gal is being coy and flighly, move on. We take your word for it she is a 9 and can get the top 1%. But, just like you said, we all know the guys in the top 1% have lots of action. And she probably missed her chance to nail the guy down. She will undoubtedly snare some rich guy.

….Why fret over a 9′s problems when you have many more 6-7 fishes to fry?

Me: Now this sounds interesting, how do you think this sort of thing would work?

A Definite Beta Guy

@ PVW

Me: We are seeing the world of combat dating at work. Women are at a distinct disadvantage: see BB’s post #103.

There’s strategy, and there’s mindset. It’s like playing poker and trying to tell an extremely angry, tempermental guy that his strategy doesn’t work, except that’s silly, he can’t implement a good strategy because his mindset is screwed up. He gets angry too easily, he can’t think, he can’t…etc.

He needs to fix his mindset before he can even think about fixing his strategy.

Same thing with good ol’ Anne, here, IMO. It’s one thing that you don’t wash a guy’s socks because you realize he is just going to take advantage of you, it’s another not to do his socks because you experience sheer terror at the thought.

In the first, you can switch to washing the guy’s socks, if that’s what the strategy calls for.

For Anne? Even if it WERE good strategy, she would be gripped by total terror and wouldn’t be able to wash those socks.

Yeah, I do think guys who do any of those things solely to get women into bed is pretty weak. Take no. 1 for example, “climbing the corporate ladder” (which is synonymous with no 3 in a lot of ways). The vast majority of my friends work in very high-paying (banker, lawyer, consulting, medical) jobs, and are extremely good at them. Most of them are also pretty good at picking up women. I cannot recall one instance of a friend of mine using their employment status or income to try and get a woman into bed. They do it because THEY want to, not because it will help them get laid. In fact, the only time I remember it is when my friend who’s a trader at Goldman used it when he was miserable at hipster bar in Brooklyn. He used it to get the girls to STOP talking to him (hipsters don’t think too highly of finance).

And @what Ian said, +1. Affected confidence and swagger is exactly that. It’s fake. Two of the biggest players I know curl into the fetal position if they are ever confronted in a strong way by another guy. One of them is so insecure that he won’t go get money from the ATM without someone going with him (and man, the meltdowns he has when people make fun of him for hooking up with the occasional fatty…). I also have friends who are naturally confident, dominant, and not pussies in every situation. I draw a distinction, you seem not to.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

In fact, the only time I remember it is when my friend who’s a trader at Goldman used it when he was miserable at hipster bar in Brooklyn. He used it to get the girls to STOP talking to him (hipsters don’t think too highly of finance).

LMAO, that’s hilarious. That needs to be a scene in Girls.

pvw

@ADBG: He needs to fix his mindset before he can even think about fixing his strategy.

Me: This is what I was thinking as well as per post 174….and Susan, as well, of course, in her original response….

Ian

Well played on the Bronies thing. Sorry if we disrupted the love fest by pointing out reality.

I see how you survived the bars, without AMOG braggadocio. The cowboys may respond to compliments, side-steps, and pats on the back, but I do not. You’re not disarming anger, you’re the subject of accurate, low opinion. Objectively, mathematically, whatever misfortune befalls you makes the world a better place, I will root for it, with clear conscience, until you display a valuable trait.

A Definite Beta Guy

It’s great to see the Zach post above mine contrast with the PVW post.

These player guys that crumble into bawling wrecks have learned the ways to seduce women without actually fixing their mindsets and are walking time-bombs.

Anne is also a walking time-bomb, as far as I can tell, which is why she can have sex with a man she barely knows yet not be able to make him coffee. Based on what I am reading, Susan thinks that Anne just has a strategy problem.

IMO, Anne has an inner game problem. Which isn’t surprising, she’s 22 and that one guy tore her to pieces.

Teaching her strategies and Girl Game is going to render her very vulnerable while giving the illusion of success.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Based on what I am reading, Susan thinks that Anne just has a strategy problem.

IMO, Anne has an inner game problem. Which isn’t surprising, she’s 22 and that one guy tore her to pieces.

I acknowledge in the post that Anne needs to be more communicative about her own emotional state. Obviously, she is a bit wary and with good reason. It may be that the timing just isn’t right – she’s clearly still deeply affected by her experience with the cad.

She also needs to wise up to SMP dynamics. High value guys are not going to jump through hoops. She is very young, still in school, figuring it out as she goes. This will have been a learning experience for her, whatever happens.

pvw

@ADBG 226–what are the numbers of the posts?

A Definite Beta Guy

Which ones? Zach was 223, yours was 224

pvw

@ADBG, thanks!

http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

ADBG “Teaching her strategies and Girl Game is going to render her very vulnerable while giving the illusion of success.”

I don’t quite understand this. If she gave up being aloof when she actually likes a guy, tells the truth about how she feels and gives more emotional escalation, then she would actually have “success” insofar as she would be with the guy she likes. How is that an illusion? Or do you mean that she might get used by a player, who doesn’t actually want her for more than a notch? Isn’t she hot enough that if she were also feminine and has “girl game,” she would be seen as girlfriend material by even top guys?

Emily

Definite Beta,

Your analysis makes sense. I also get the impression that Anne was “punishing” the new guy for the way that the previous guy had treated her. She should probably recover from the last breakup before getting involved with a new guy.

Underdog

@Zach

No obsession with sex, and yet you’re on a site called Hooking Up Smart deriding guys who have learned how to hook up smart. Hmm….

And your trader friend, just like the rockstar or the pro athlete, is doing what he does in order to raise status and accumulate wealth/security — something that will ultimately gain him access to higher value members of the opposite sex. To think of any other reason for it is to be in denial.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Underdog

No obsession with sex, and yet you’re on a site called Hooking Up Smart deriding guys who have learned how to hook up smart. Hmm….

Are you laboring under the misimpression that HUS is a blog for men to figure out how to get laid? In a nutshell, here’s what Hooking Up Smart means:

NSBM: No sex before monogamy

yareallyhahaha

@Ian
“The cowboys may respond to compliments, side-steps, and pats on the back, but I do not.”

lol are these also the same player guys who cry themselves to sleep at night when they kick out their one-night stand bar slut, because their lives are so empty and meaningless and they know they have a hole in their soul? I enjoy these cartoon character versions of us you guys come up with.

A Definite Beta Guy

Hope, she may succeed in getting into a relationship with a guy, but that’s not the same as being happy with herself, or being mentally stable.

That’s what I mean.

Also, if your inner core isn’t working, I doubt you can fully implement all of the strategies that need to be implemented in the first place. A girl who isn’t comfortable with emotional escalation, who then tries to emotionally escalate, might succeed in getting the guy, but it might burn her out, or it might come across as fake to a guy, or she might think to herself “blah, what kind of guy would actually fall for this.”

Just1Z

“Killer Joe” – WOW

a twisted version of Cinderella / Snow White, they say?

hmmm

lots of twisted, that’s for sure. great film for da menz. not sure the ‘fair sex’, though.

Mikey

Hmmm…..definitely some anti-PUA hate here. Even when you disagree with what they do, it doesn’t mean you have to disagree with what the tactics or knowledge is (evo psy).

I’m more disturbed by the notion Susan implies that the PUA’s are mentally damaged because they learned how to attract women after a bad experience with women. (such as being friendzoned). Why would they be mentally damaged but a girl damaged by a cad (Anne) is cheerlead into doing better?

In other words, personal transformations come about through hardship, to imply that hardship means PUA’s are mentally unbalanced is false.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

I’m more disturbed by the notion Susan implies that the PUA’s are mentally damaged because they learned how to attract women after a bad experience with women. (such as being friendzoned). Why would they be mentally damaged but a girl damaged by a cad (Anne) is cheerlead into doing better?

If Anne dedicated her life to getting commitment from low quality guys just for sport, I’d say the same thing to her.

As for PUAs being mentally damaged, I can’t speak for all of them, but the ones on this thread show clear signs of sociopathy, narcissism and Machiavellianism.

“IMO, Anne has an inner game problem. Which isn’t surprising, she’s 22 and that one guy tore her to pieces.

Teaching her strategies and Girl Game is going to render her very vulnerable while giving the illusion of success.”

I agree. Susan, remember in a previous thread where I suggested that people of both genders learn to game from the inside out? This is what I was talking about. Anne looks to have rolled along doing what she does until she ran into someone who appears unwilling to play the game she was asking him to play. More strategy is the typical answer, but like ADBG, I don’t think that will be the answer in the long run. A look inward will make anything she learns from this point more effective because it will come from the right place- it’ll be authentic, and she won’t encounter a shock when she runs into someone who, from the looks of it, has himself handled, because she’ll have herself handled.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@BroHamlet

A look inward will make anything she learns from this point more effective because it will come from the right place- it’ll be authentic, and she won’t encounter a shock when she runs into someone who, from the looks of it, has himself handled, because she’ll have herself handled.

Honestly, I think it’s a bit over the top to start diagnosing Anne with not having her shit together. She wrote for strategic advice, I gave it. I’m not her therapist. I included some reality checks around what’s fair, what this might look like from his POV, and how she might effect a meeting.

yareallyhahaha

@Mikey

“In other words, personal transformations come about through hardship, to imply that hardship means PUA’s are mentally unbalanced is false.”

We sure are getting shit on around here just for having a different view. And not even a WRONG view, as a number of posters including yourself have mentioned, we’re just pointing out what’s right there for anyone to see…it’s just something that makes everyone feel “squicky” lol

Shoot the messenger much?

@Underdog
“shmeminine shmimperative.”

lol’ed.

Still waiting on that logical fact-filled rebuttal to the observation that you’ve just proved Game works on hot high-quality girls by telling an HB9 to go “crawling on her hands and knees” to a guy (knowingly or unknowingly) running Dread Game, Sue.

http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

I like how the guys are equating “self-respect” with “Dread Game.”

Meh, it’s almost Christmas. Need to write more envelopes.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

But seriously, here you have a textbook example of (by your scale) an exceptionally attractive 22 year old woman who WAS attracted to a guy displaying Alpha dominance via his indifference to her –something she’s unaccustomed to as a high SMV girl.

And, as Game would predict, she’s locked into qualifying for his intimate acceptance. In fact you yourself want to characterize the guy as a hopeful LTR potential. How do you not see the irony in that?

Your reading comprehension skills are lacking.

First, Stephen took her out to dinner and walked her home without escalating at all on several occasions. It was precisely this behavior, along with his personality, that had her thinking of him as a potential husband and father. Had he acted alpha from the get go, she would have nexted him. While she was away, he texted and checked in regularly. He has also texted and called frequently, and has openly told her on many occasions how much he likes her and how lucky he feels.

Second, I am pro-Game. Stephen sounds like a natural, someone with self-respect who has no plans to be a doormat. I give him credit and of course am not surprised that the threat of his removing his affection has Anne alarmed. To the extent that he is demonstrating self-respect, it is not with the intention of provoking anxiety, but rather of removing himself from a relationship where her interest seems to have waned. It’s perfectly reasonable behavior on his part – not the manipulative nonsense of spinning plates, two in the kitty, etc.

Game emulates real, natural dominance by providing codified behavioral correlates. As far as we know, as a beta with self-respect, Stephen has no need for Game.

Mikey

Seriously, it’s like people only respond here if game principles sounds nice and acceptable. Hope, Dead Game simply is reminding the person who acted up that you have other options, when Anne acted like a brat she needed to be reminded he wouldn’t take it and went silent. But since it’s called Dread Game and you don’t like that name, you’re opposed.

I’ll leave it to the PUA’s to rename everything to acceptable terms “Sunshine Happy Tulip Game” then maybe the principles themselves can finally be discussed.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Mikey

Hope, Dead Game simply is reminding the person who acted up that you have other options, when Anne acted like a brat she needed to be reminded he wouldn’t take it and went silent.

First of all, Dread Game is preventative – it is not solely used when women have “acted up” or “acted like a brat.” Rollo uses Dread Game on his faithful wife by flirting with other women in front of her to make her jealous and anxious. No doubt she sleeps with one eye open.

Second, Stephen did nothing to imply he has options. My guess is he went to the party on Saturday alone. He may have options, probably does. For that reason, he had no need to explicitly say so.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Mikey

Seriously, it’s like people only respond here if game principles sounds nice and acceptable.

Make no mistake. I support Game as it serves to help guys who want relationships get them. Game increases the number of attractive men, and I’m all for that. I do not support the use of Game for P&D’ing. You are at the wrong blog for that.

pvw

@Brohamlet:

A look inward will make anything she learns from this point more effective because it will come from the right place- it’ll be authentic, and she won’t encounter a shock when she runs into someone who, from the looks of it, has himself handled, because she’ll have herself handled.

Me: As part of that look inward, some of the basics, that being in a serious adult relationship is not for the immature and childish.

Or…those who seem to have problems realizing that their partner might have needs and interests which have to be worked through and negotiated, ie., empathy and consideration just might be necessary, as well as a dose of humility to remove any entitlement mentalities. In other words, it isn’t always about you and only you. It is about a give and take, not one side always taking, taking, taking with no sense of appreciation, gratitude and willingness to sacrifice for the greater good, and that can include for the benefit of one’s partner. All of this ony happens through the development of true intimacy and trust; these are to be worked at and develop over time; it won’t come in the midst of serious attitude problems and through the illusion of superficial intimacy.

I can probably go on, but that is a beginning, as I think about my marriage and the marriages of those around me.

http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

pvw #240, I agree completely. But it’s never too early to start learning those things! Age is not a barrier to empathy and respect.

Susan, lol.

pvw

@Hope: Age is not a barrier to empathy and respect

Me: Thanks; I forgot to add the word respect, but all that I wrote implies it….

Russ in Texas

Sales 101: you talk in the language of your customer.

An effective communicator translates his ideas into the idiom of the person listening. It actually makes PERFECT sense that communication meant to open the eyeballs of men who for one reason or another have poor social skills and can’t get it together with women ….wouldn’t translate well when put directly to people who are not the intended audience (women). The difference in rhetorical style says *nothing* about the quality of the idea itself.

So yes, “dread game” and “I’ve got too much self-respect to put up with puerile manipulative shit” can in fact be synonymous without diminishing parties simply because they prefer one phrase to the other.

Sadly, based on follow-up questions, I’d be surprised if Anne were able to learn *anything* from what she’s read. She’s simply not a keeper at this point.

Anne

I read yareally’s first post but ignored the rest.

Susan, your post #238 is spot on.
I texted him this afternoon (from your advice), saying sorry for flaky behaviour, telling him I was going home. I got a reply, saying he was back home too, in order to attend a funeral, that he’d love to see me, and asking how I was and asking about an infection I had a while ago. He’s back for Christmas too and he told me his plans the next three days so we can get together back here (we’re from the same city).

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Anne

Hallelujah! I am so happy for you! It sounds like he welcomed your reaching out, and has no interest in punishing you or playing any games. Well done. So, the takeaway is…emote. Open yourself up, take the risk. There are no guarantees you won’t be hurt again as you were last summer, but he sounds like a good man – you are not likely to be treated with carelessness or duplicity. Shake off your misgivings about the cad and focus on the dad right in front of you.

Think of ways to express that you care. Do those feminine, nurturing things that feel a bit unnatural right now. In other words, your job is to escalate emotionally with Stephen. You’ve been given another chance, don’t blow it!

I hope you’ll circle back and let us know how it goes! In the meantime, have a lovely Christmas!

Höllenhund

“Rollo, Yareallypua and Hollenhund in one thread. How many brain cells have been sacrificed? How many readers have fled the bizarro comments of these middle aged prurient men?”

That’s their problem. I know your female readers simply cannot handle much, so I specifically avoided using swear words, derogatory phrases, ad hominem arguments and whatnot. If some woman is still offended, what the hell is she doing reading the comments section of a blog? She should turn off the computer and read some women’s mag, lest she become offended by anything around her.

For the record, the sensitivity of my readers has been greatly exaggerated. I don’t think it’s a question of what they can handle, I think it’s a question of why spend your time with a bunch of bitchy men online.

JP

@Susan:

“Rollo, Yareallypua and Hollenhund in one thread. How many brain cells have been sacrificed? How many readers have fled the bizarro comments of these middle aged prurient men?”

I take it that this is the normal response of your Dear HUS letters.

It’s like anti-advertising.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@JP

I take it that this is the normal response of your Dear HUS letters.

It’s not! I have no idea why these guys descended on this post. None of them is a regular here, and it’s not like I’ve said anything controversial. Weird.

Underdog

Back to Anne, I don’t think this guy is purposely running game to get her back. Most likely, he’s simply nexting her. If he’s a player type, then he’s already got the ass. If he’s a dad type, then he’s most likely realized by now that Anne’s too emotionally unstable to be a mom.

I’d advise Anne to move on and take some time off for introspection.

Höllenhund

Sandro Botticelli’s Venus wouldn’t count as a 9 today. Standards have changed, especially those of the top men.

This attitude’d be warranted if your blog were about cooking, gardening, knitting or sharing baby pictures or whatever. But it’s not. It’s about the current SMP, and one group among many that can provide insight, no matter how amoral or unethical you think it is, are PUAs. It’s just a way it is. If I start a blog about cars and a bunch of mechanics show up and comment, is it “hostile takeover”? Lulz.

Besides, there’s no “takeover”. Nobody is trying to take over your blog or destroy it. You’re becoming way too paranoid. You’re not a martyr for some heroic cause.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Hollenhund

How can PUAs provide insight to my readers?

Höllenhund

“Being a productive member of society and living a life of purpose can take many forms.”

That’s beside the point. One can be a PUA who’s “extremely competent at understanding something and using that understanding to achieve a goal”. Doesn’t matter if he’s society’s pack mule or not. What’s this talk of “parasites” anyway? Are inner city single moms and their future criminal thugspawn included on that list?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

What’s this talk of “parasites” anyway? Are inner city single moms and their future criminal thugspawn included on that list?

Sure, if they’re not contributing anything to society. It’s not that lofty a goal – one can work hard digging ditches and make the world a better place. It’s the indulgence of base appetites that I detest. An inner city single mom who works hard to provide for her children and tries to get them into a decent school is OK in my book.

What will yareallypua leave behind when his wet dick has been eaten by worms?

JP

“Being a productive member of society and living a life of purpose can take many forms. Here are some pastimes that do not make the grade:

“Transcript: What is the difference between a man and a parasite? A man builds. A parasite asks “Where is my share?” A man creates. A parasite says, “What will the neighbors think?” A man invents. A parasite says, “Watch out, or you might tread on the toes of God…”

@ Underdog, as you can see I wrote a response. He wants to see me again, I suppose I will find out more later.

JP

Some fictional background for the fictional author of that parasite quote:

“Andrew Ryan was born Andrei Rianofski[1] in a village near Minsk in Russia (modern Belarus), during the time when the Tsar still held autocratic rule over the country. In 1917 he witnessed the Russian Revolution which catapulted the Bolshevik Party into power.[2] Ryan’s experiences under Soviet rule led him to his personal philosophy: the modern world was created by great men who strove to make their own way. Anytime “parasites” gained control of such a world, they destroyed it (as the Soviets did “trading one lie for another,” the autocratic rule of the Tsar for the repressions of Bolshevism). In 1919 he anglicized his name to Andrew Ryan and fled Russia to go to America, believing it to be a place where a great man could prosper.[3]

For a time, he was devoted to his adopted country, grateful for the wealth and fame it awarded his intellect and determination. However, the state social programs adopted in the 30s increasingly tested that devotion. His experiences in the “worker’s paradise” made Ryan despise the ideals of Socialism, believing that those who benefited from others were “parasites” (e.g. he considered Roosevelt and his “New Dealers” to be the ones “spoon-feeding” Americans on the “Bolshevik Poison”). In his mind, one could only own what one earned. For instance, he once owned a large forest as a personal retreat, one that many groups envied (one group told him that it “belonged to God,” demanding that he establish a public park there). When the government attempted to nationalize it as parkland, Ryan’s response was to burn it to the ground so no one could have it.[4]

The final straw for Ryan was the destruction of Hiroshima with the atomic bomb.[5] In his eyes, the bomb was the ultimate corruption of his ideals — science and determination harnessed for destruction, creating a weapon that gave the “parasites” the ability to destroy anything that they could not seize. ”

Congratulations. Honestly. Based on what I’d read from your follow-ups, I didn’t think you had it in you. Very happy to be Random Stranger Proven Wrong.

@Susan,

As an old fart I once knew said, “never do a man a small wrong.”

Not a PUA (yuck), but I cop to a *serious* case of the Macchiavelli’s… in the absence of positive pressure I am an ice-hearted son of a bitch who will eventually show up on CNN: it runs in my family and has to be kept on a tight leash at all times. Difference is that SOME of us know this isn’t something to be proud of. I’m lucky: not everybody in my shoes has somebody like my wife in her life.

1. If that’s Roissy’s definition of “dread game,” then I stand corrected. I’d understood it as instilling fear that a given bad behavior means end-of-relationship (which is pretty common sense).
2. Can you sell me a vowel on this one?

“@Russ
Easy test for women: how do you feel about washing his socks?
Oof, you’re a week too late on that one.”

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Russ

. If that’s Roissy’s definition of “dread game,” then I stand corrected. I’d understood it as instilling fear that a given bad behavior means end-of-relationship (which is pretty common sense).

From Roissy’s Dread Post:

Managing your relationship in such a way that she is left with a constant, gnawing feeling of impending doom will do more for your cause than all the Valentine’s Day cards and expertly performed tongue love in the world. Like it or not, the threat of a looming breakup, whether the facts justify it or not, will spin her into a paranoid estrogen-fueled tizzy, and she’ll spend every waking second thinking about you, thinking about the relationship, thinking about how to fix it. Her love for you will blossom under these conditions. Result: she works harder to please you.

Examples of effective doom inducement:

Turn off your cell phone twice a week. Alternate days.

Make a blatant but plausibly deniable move on one of her friends when she’s not around.

Call her from a very busy place so that she can hear women’s voices laughing and shrieking in the background.

Mention how skilled your Russian ex was at giving head. Bring it up again a few days later, pretending not to remember the first time you mentioned it.

Be seen by your girlfriend flirting with other women in a social venue.

Cook her a romantic candlelight dinner at home. Make it a memorable experience, complete with jazz, chocolate, and rose petals. Then, do not talk with her for four days afterwards.

Ignore her calls for a week.

Gaze longingly into her eyes, say how hot she looks, then immediately glance sidelong at the bosom of any strange woman in the vicinity.

Say things like “I really value my independence and freedom” relevant to nothing in particular. I

Have an affair and make sure she finds out about it… Then without waiting for her response calmly walk out the door and break off all contact for two weeks.

“@ Underdog, as you can see I wrote a response. He wants to see me again, I suppose I will find out more later.”

And another relationship crisis solved by the crack team of HUS commenteers!

Maybe.

I suppose this a follow-up is required.

Since this is the holiday season, why don’t we say three weeks?

Does that work for everyone?

How about checking back in, say,

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Since this is the holiday season, why don’t we say three weeks?

Does that work for everyone?

How about checking back in, say,

LOL, I promise to report back if I get a follow up.

Russ in Texas

“Rollo uses Dread Game on his faithful wife by flirting with other women in front of her to make her jealous and anxious. No doubt she sleeps with one eye open.”

In the words of the Great Turqsidian Muse, “that is fucked up.”

Underdog

@Susan

” it was not Stephen’s intent to provoke anxiety… Dread Game involves all kinds of fakery… Stephen didn’t engage in manipulative tactics at all.”

Courtship ALWAYS involve fakery and manipulation — unless Anne is the type of girl who doesn’t wear make up, high heels, or fix her hair.

What if Stephen wanted Anne to be his gf but knew that pursuing her would make her lose attraction but freezing her out / giving her anxiety would spike her attraction level? Would you call that fakery and manipulation? I think your problem with dread game lies more with intent than tactics.

And yes, freezing a girl out is dread game, much like shutting your phone off for a day is dread game, much like calling a girl while you’re in a bar is dread game. All of them give the effect of you having options, which causes her to feel jealous and anxious.

“NSBM: No sex before monogamy”

So this blog is for men who want to toil in the friend zone?

JP

“As for PUAs being mentally damaged, I can’t speak for all of them, but the ones on this thread show clear signs of sociopathy, narcissism and Machiavellianism.”

That’s not “mentally damaged”, unless you are talking about a clear-cut kill the puppies for fun kind of person. (Which is what happened to one guy I knew in college who snapped. I think he was smashing kittens into walls or something. One of the most bizarre stories I ever heard.)

That’s spiritually damaged, which is a horse of a different color. Like I said, it’s a cesspool radiating despair and discord.

JP

@Susan:

I thought you said that you discotinued the Letters because of the incoming artillery fire like you got today.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@JP

I thought you said that you discotinued the Letters because of the incoming artillery fire like you got today.

Yeah, it was a problem. Not everyone was hard on Anne, but in general, these letters bring guys out of the woodwork to complain about women. There was one poor woman named Casey – I’ll never forget it. Her letter so inflamed the guys that one blogger ran off and wrote a post denouncing her.

I really like to keep things positive, you know? I was pretty hard on Anne. I spoke to her like I would speak to a young woman I know well (which is why I told her that). I told her she’d been acting like a spoiled brat, in fact. I give her a lot of credit for absorbing that feedback and turning it around.

I don’t know if my advice was good or not, but hey, she’s got another date lined up. Now it’s up to her.

Adam

Roissy’s definition of dread game:

“Instilling the dread of an impending breakup or loss of interest to promote a healthy relationship.”

Fits what this Stephen guy did to a T.

Ted D

Susan – “I think it’s a question of why spend your time with a bunch of bitchy men online?”

Because we have milk and cookies?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Because we have milk and cookies?

I didn’t mean you Sweet Ted. I’m referring to the Dark Lords of the sphere. Boo.

Höllenhund

“How can PUAs provide insight to my readers?”

Who else is going to do so? Other women, who only confirm each other’s emotions for each other? Tradcons? Feminists? The Man Up Brigade?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Who else is going to do so? Other women, who only confirm each other’s emotions for each other? Tradcons? Feminists? The Man Up Brigade?

There are about 60 male “regulars” here, and none of them fits that description. I feel confident that my female readers are getting good and useful information from them. They’re better than I am – I do what I can in the posts, but am happy to pass the baton to both men and women in the comment threads. Increasingly, I see myself as a conduit between the readers and the commenters.

Russ in Texas

@HH: That’s not an answer. That’s not even a thesis.

@Susan#282,

Holy shit. Yeah, stand corrected. I don’t have enough palms for the facepalms that requires.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Russ

No problem. A belated welcome to HUS, you’ve left some good comments. I’m always happy to have new commenters, and those who admit they’re still learning (aren’t we all?) are particularly welcome!

Lokland

@Hope

” I like how the guys are equating “self-respect” with “Dread Game.””

This should speak volumes to the women about how men were raised.
What the ladies are defining as self-respect men are defining as evil/dread inducing.

HanSolo

@yareally

Yes, many women (and some men) love drama.

@OffTheCuff

Why? I won’t feel sympathy for women who won’t extend the same sympathy to men. Not specifically, and definitely not generically.

If there’s no quarter for deltas and gammas other than laugh at him at wordt, and say “man up” a best – then it’s the same for women. I make exceptions for those who go out and seem kind to those less fortunate

Because I am a sympathetic and empathetic kind of guy at heart. Now if they are mean bitches then they lose my concern real fast.

Now, I don’t have THAT much sympathy for 9’s and 10’s because they still do have so many options. The 10 can probably find a male 9 who will be faithful if she screens for character. The 9 can go for the male 8.

I also care about the delta (average) guys and the schlubs, like Sam on Game of Thrones.

JP

“Now, I don’t have THAT much sympathy for 9′s and 10′s because they still do have so many options. The 10 can probably find a male 9 who will be faithful if she screens for character. The 9 can go for the male 8.”

I wonder how many of the 9’s and 10’s go horribly wrong, life wise.

It’s kind of like having a massive “please hit on me” target on their back for a large portion of their lives.

Sai

@HH
“Sandro Botticelli’s Venus wouldn’t count as a 9 today. Standards have changed, especially those of the top men.”
Ehhhhh?
I guess you aren’t yanking our chains. What would she count as today?

And that “have an affair and make sure she finds out” is actually a tactic. Trotsky’s balls, I’d rather be alone. SMH

J

It’s actually moronic that this post about Anne’s relationship is even generating discussion about PUAs.

It’s actually entirely predictible that this post about Anne’s relationship is even generating discussion about PUAs.

A pretty girl got a comeuppance; let the fapping begin.

J

HH: “Sandro Botticelli’s Venus wouldn’t count as a 9 today. Standards have changed, especially those of the top men.”

Sai: “Ehhhhh? I guess you aren’t yanking our chains. What would she count as today?”

HH and the some of the other denizens of the ‘sphere have rather exacting standards for women. I’m certain that even the goddess of love would need to work hard to match their values in the SMP. 😉

Russ in Texas

@Adam#280.

Unlike HanSolo, I’m NOT a sympathetic and empathetic guy at heart: I have busted my ASS to develop those traits, and even I can see the distinction between:

Instilling dread of relationship loss as a *reaction* to shitty behavior
Instilling dread of relationship loss as a proactive emotional manipulation

#1 is called “I’m not putting up with puerile shit.”
#2 is called “treating your woman like shit.”

J

But then again, you already know it’s men who define what’s sexy for women already,..

You know, I truly question this. Certainly women can not dictate what men find attractive, but our ability to attract a man rests on our ability to understand what men find attractive. Any women who has attracted a good guy, locked him down and held on to him for an extended period of time has a pretty good idea of what like.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Certainly women can not dictate what men find attractive, but our ability to attract a man rests on our ability to understand what men find attractive.

The idea that women don’t understand what men want assumes that women are 1) blind: We don’t notice which women get a lot of male attention, and 2) Can’t read: have no access to the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition or Maxim’s Top 100.

Rollo assumes that because some women wear their hair short or dress modestly they have no idea what men like, and it makes him angry that women might choose to present themselves without regard for the male gaze.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

Han: “Because I am a sympathetic and empathetic kind of guy at heart.”

Why? What do they do for you? Or maybe are you high value enough, that women treat you well, when there’s nothing to gain from it? So strange.

Han: “I also care about the delta (average) guys and the schlubs, like Sam on Game of Thrones.”

I don’t question that, that’s different.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@OTC

Why? What do they do for you? Or maybe are you high value enough, that women treat you well, when there’s nothing to gain from it? So strange.

Do you have any idea how agentic/narcissistic this sounds? It’s all about you and what you can “get” from other people.

Russ in Texas

@J#303: given the occasionally wildly different standards of beauty (I want to hurl when I pass a Victoria’s Secret, for instance), I’m not sure the dichotomy is really meaningful.

Karinthy Frigyes comes to mind…. “How could woman and man understand each other? They want different things: the woman wants the man, and the man wants the woman.”

HanSolo

@OffTheCuff

Why am I empathetic and sympathetic? That’s like asking why the sky is blue*. I just am.

Going into it a bit more, I just have a giving and caring personality beneath my sometimes very logical and fact-oriented manner. Unfortunately, in the past that led me to being too giving with women and they took that as me being needy and lower value (and there was a bit of actual neediness there too). So, developing more self-value and inner game has made me less giving up front and helped with attracting women.

I’m not religious anymore but part of me still believes in selfless love and that it can help bring out similar feelings in the goodhearted. But, I have learned to be more careful with whom I share that, especially in a romantic way. But as to someone who really needs help I’m still there for them.

I just don’t evaluate everything in terms of what is in it for me. In a sense, just being my best self is reward enough, and having love, empathy and sympathy is part of that best self.

I guess I just have a lot of love in my core and believe it can transform part of the world, if only for moments at a time and with select people. But I’m not an idealist. The world would be better off without some people. I wish Joffrey would have been killed by Aria at the beginning of Game of Thrones. But then again, like Gandolf says to Frodo, I don’t feel wise enough in most cases to know who should and shouldn’t, but some people seem like obvious cases, like Hitler.

*That was meant rhetorically. As a physicist I do understand the reason why it is blue. lol

Jesse

My interest in these pictures of Anne has certainly been piqued. (Not expecting anything – I understand the confidentiality involved and all that.) I don’t consider Kate Upton to be extremely attractive. She’s not ugly, but rather plain in my view.

PS: Ms. Walsh, I just wanted to send my best wishes. I’m not really the target demographic for this site (20 year-old male), but I find these sociological things mildly stimulating so I enjoy checking your site from time to time. This is my first post here. To be honest my eyes glaze over a lot of the time — X has a crush on Y who may or may not still have feelings for Z who used to be friends with A who is competing with X for… omigawd, what ever are they going to do??? — sorry, just not much for gossip, and I really don’t care what other people are doing. Especially when girls start talking about their love lives.

Primarily what I do is read the interesting articles and sift through the comments for your writings, because what you’ve got to say is interesting, and you seem sweet. I like you. Cheers. Happy holidays too.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Jesse

Thanks so much for checking in, I appreciate that! I’m glad you enjoy HUS on occasion, and would love for you to comment again if the mood strikes! I’ll give you a holiday treat, since you are not a Kate Upton fan. Did you notice that in the post I referred to Kate Upton on a good day? That’s because she’s the most photoshopped model in the world. Here she is on a bad day:

In the first picture she’s not that great while in the 2nd she’s very hot IMO. But I wonder if they photoshopped her face to be narrower in the 2nd or if she just was chubbier in the first pic.

I personally am somewhat skeptical of other people’s ratings of women because most of the time, especially when it’s another woman giving the rating, I build up these expectations only to have them disappointed.

I’m kind of dating a girl right now and she went on about how her friend is soooo gorgeous. Then I met her friend and she was a 7.5.

I had a roommate once who was swooning over and in love with this girl that I was dating (and thought she was very pretty) while I was debating if she was cute enough. Actually, happened with him and two girls so I soon learned to discount his ratings. Now he thought the 9’s in my eyes were gorgeous too but probably would have said they were more like 10’s.

And yes, pvw, you can rag on me some more for being an insensitive bastard who is ruining things for all women. 😉

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

I personally am somewhat skeptical of other people’s ratings of women because most of the time, especially when it’s another woman giving the rating, I build up these expectations only to have them disappointed.

That’s funny, I have found you to be a very easy grader. 😛

pvw

At Hans Solo, huh?

HanSolo

@pvw

Maybe I’m confusing you with someone else. If so, my apologies. Actually, I am confusing you, so forgive me. Hmmm, now I feel like a jerk.

http://dannyfrom504.wordpress.com dannyfrom504

am, am i still allowed to post Tia?

i see and deal with this attitude all the time. usually from 7-9’s in their early 20’s. and in most case i blame guys for constantly kissing said girls asses and fawning over how “hot” she is. but they can’t help but respond to a guy that treats them like shit. you become the “i can fix him” guy.

trust me, there’s no rational reason for me to close the girls that i do. i have the sex appeal of stomach cancer.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@danny

am, am i still allowed to post Tia?

Of course! Why wouldn’t you be?

but they can’t help but respond to a guy that treats them like shit. you become the “i can fix him” guy.

But Stephen did not treat her like shit. He just treated himself with respect. He never fawned over her or was supplicating. There is no push pull here. When she texted yesterday he said he really wants to see her. He accepted her apology with grace, and they made a plan.

Stephen’s behavior should be the norm. He is a dad, not a cad.

Anne has no interest in a man she has to “fix.” The first thing she said is that he has the qualities of a great husband and father, something she doesn’t often see.

Overall, no Game, just common sense. Nothing to see here.

Emily

@ Anna,

Congrats!!!! (Also: wow, you MUST be hot to be able to pull that off!!!!) I know we were all a bit hard on you, but hopefully the tough love paid off. Good luck!

>> “Instilling dread of relationship loss as a *reaction* to shitty behavior
Instilling dread of relationship loss as a proactive emotional manipulation
#1 is called “I’m not putting up with puerile shit.”
#2 is called “treating your woman like shit.””

+1. #1 is perfectly reasonable, but I’d rather buy cats than deal with #2 (and I hate cats!)

HanSolo (308),
There’s a study somewhere (I’m too lazy to find it) that said that older women are better at guessing which women men will find attractive. Maybe with the younger women, it’s a subconscious intrasexual competition thing? ie. They don’t want to “build up” the girls who are already hotter than them? …just a thought. Either way, it’s interesting stuff.

HanSolo

@Emily

Nooooo! Not another study. I refuse to analyze any more studies. 😉

But, that does sound interesting.

BroHamlet

@Susan

“Honestly, I think it’s a bit over the top to start diagnosing Anne with not having her shit together. She wrote for strategic advice, I gave it. I’m not her therapist. I included some reality checks around what’s fair, what this might look like from his POV, and how she might effect a meeting.”

Sounds like she got past this point without any issue, which is good. My comments weren’t written with the assumption that she was off kilter in any serious way, just that she needed to do some thinking about how she tends to react to these situations. By her own admission she ended up temporarily “going out of her mind” about something that anyone who has enough self-control to sit down and get their emotions in check can see clearly. She reacted the way her world conditioned her to (external influences), and luckily this time, she didn’t have to learn the hard way, as say a situation where she was deeply invested in a long term relationship, and tried to pull the same “withhold” game, bruised something really valuable to her and had to figure out how to repair it. The thing that I think both ADBG and I were getting at, is that someone who has the inner piece down won’t get thrown by something like this, because they won’t be reacting out of fear of loss (or a need to reassure themselves that they are worthy), and they will have the confidence to own when they’re wrong and realize that it doesn’t make you weak to admit it. That is what I meant all along by it “coming from the right place” and not just doing what works because it gets you results. We don’t know Anne, or what she’s like, but this situation points to a classic case of someone getting their expectations and self-beliefs checked. Notice that this was a case of “Beautiful Women Must Try Harder”, but not in the way the title suggests- sounds a lot like she had to try harder to manage the way she handled things. For someone whose experience is mostly one of people validating them, like most attractive women, it’s even more important to focus on what’s inside. Maybe you’ve posted on this, if not, it’d be something to think about.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@BroHamlet

The thing that I think both ADBG and I were getting at, is that someone who has the inner piece down won’t get thrown by something like this, because they won’t be reacting out of fear of loss (or a need to reassure themselves that they are worthy), and they will have the confidence to own when they’re wrong and realize that it doesn’t make you weak to admit it. That is what I meant all along by it “coming from the right place” and not just doing what works because it gets you results. We don’t know Anne, or what she’s like, but this situation points to a classic case of someone getting their expectations and self-beliefs checked.

Yes, I cosign this. I hope Anne will reflect and learn something from this experience. If not, this will go south again soon.

Yesterday I was baffled by the appearance of PUA types, but it must be this. They were aroused by Anne’s agony. It’s also noteworthy how anxious they were to chalk this up as a Game success story. When it’s the opposite – the rare story of a high value male who has good character to go with his high self-esteem. No need for manipulation on his part whatsoever – just reinforcing the behavior he liked, and withholding reinforcement for the behavior he didn’t.

szopen

@underdog

I call female projection on this one. Guys will always pursue the path of least resistance when it comes to sex. Men don’t spend billions on porn and prostitutes for the emotional roller coaster.

You are wrong. I saw too many crazy girls with no looks, who were constantly besieged by swarms of males. I’ve already described one such girl, who was ugly. It may not work for you, but many males fell (though for most of them this is only temporary) into that.

Underdog

@szopen

I’ve never seen such thing. But these swarms of males you speak of, are they alphas with options or betas without options?

@Russ in Texas

Just like Susan, your problem with dread game is not tactic, but intent.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Just like Susan, your problem with dread game is not tactic, but intent.

You cannot separate the two. The intent to manipulate by providing false information is a prerequisite to dread game. Dread game is deceit, a deliberate injury to another person in the interest of personal gain.

ThanksForTheLaughs

” A man builds. A parasite asks “Where is my share?”

These ten words explain my POV perfectly.”

So you’re saying that the only parasites you want living in this society is that charming parasite called ”woman”? Last I heard the vast majority of women do not produce anything. They do not create. They do not motivate men to do great things(Alexander The Great, Bonaparte etc; Helen of Troy only inspired senseless bloodshed).

They steal male attention in exchange of nothing. They steal alimony and mommy support(child-support). They take away the man’s house. They take away the man’s youth and health.

Susan Walsh, you’re gonna delete this post, but why would what a 50-something think of me bother me in the slightest? I’m a man. I am not a pussy-chaser like these 30-50 year old low self-esteem boys that are still seeking their mommies approval, and I’m not one of these white knights that think women are spice and everything nice.

I’m probably the only honest guy you’ll ever ”meet” on this feminist blog of yours. I am always amazed at how you claim one thing, to be on men’s side, but you can never control your true nature. You always let it come to the surface. Anne is a 9. She deserves the best of the best. But the guy she ”wants” is short and not handsome. Therefore he is a 3-4. But he’s rich. That makes him a 9-10?

Wouldn’t it be easier for you to inform your male readership that what women want is money, and all of the banging they do with the Alpha(not the PUA’s, those don’t get any at all) is just to.. huh, learn what they want in a husband an a father for their kids?!

Hilarious. PUA’S, ”conservative women(cough, cough”,) MGTOWS and MRAS. The vast majority of you would be spending some good years in an asylium if you were to come out and tell the doctors 1% of your crazy beliefs.

”I guess you aren’t yanking our chains. What would she count as today?”

Probably a 5. Don’t you know that these armchair casanovas spend their entire days banging hot babes level 100 on world of warcraft?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Thanks for the laughs

Anne is a 9. She deserves the best of the best. But the guy she ”wants” is short and not handsome. Therefore he is a 3-4. But he’s rich. That makes him a 9-10?

You lack understanding.

Anne’s looks do not entitle her to anything. It is not a question of what she deserves. Her looks are an asset she may deploy in the SMP to get a man of high value. Alone they are unlikely to get her more than a STR. For commitment, other qualities are required, as she now knows.

But the guy she ”wants” is short and not handsome. Therefore he is a 3-4.

Not to her. She’s crazy about him. She said she had butterflies the night they met, and that she’s never laughed so much on a first date. He is confident, funny, and smart. She is obviously very physically attracted to him – and she stated that she believes other women are also.

But he’s rich. That makes him a 9-10?

They’re from the same social class. This is assortative mating. But even if it wasn’t, the truth is that occupational status is the strongest female attraction cue – it trumps looks. Sorry not sorry.

Emily

>> “You are wrong. I saw too many crazy girls with no looks, who were constantly besieged by swarms of males. I’ve already described one such girl, who was ugly. It may not work for you, but many males fell (though for most of them this is only temporary) into that.”

Yeah, I think it’s really a “niche market” thing. Most guys will stay faaaaaaaaar away from the really crazy girls, but there’s a minority of guys who love them. I’ve seen many crazy girls punch well above their weight in SMV. That being said, I don’t think this is a “Girl Game” technique that can be faked. I think the crazies and the crazy-lovers are best left alone to do their own thing. 😛

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

That being said, I don’t think this is a “Girl Game” technique that can be faked. I think the crazies and the crazy-lovers are best left alone to do their own thing.

This cracked me up. I guess I won’t be writing a post on How to Get the Guy By Acting Insane.

szopen

@underdog
I have no idea. I just report what i have seen with my own eyes. My friend was going crazy about one girl, but when he has showed me her photo I was unable to say why she even laid his eyes on her. Then, when one day i visited the city when she lived and I met her, I understood immedietely. She was damn ugly, has no body to speak of, yet, when she entered the room, no other girls existed. At one moment she started to pretend to be a dog (no kidding), yes, she really was that crazy. You could never tell whether she was interested in someone, or not, she sent mixed signals to everyone around her. I was in love with some other girl at that time, which may explain I was not under her spell, some other guys were making fun of her (but still, while she was in the room, also those were only talking to her and about her), but there were always few guys who couldn’t take their eyes of her. She was really, really crazy.

I am catching up with the comments here. I find interesting that one commenter said that male alphas and betas thinking differently, while still seeming to insist to all females think alike

Iggles

@ HanSolo:

I personally am somewhat skeptical of other people’s ratings of women…

I had a roommate once who was swooning over and in love with this girl that I was dating (and thought she was very pretty) while I was debating if she was cute enough. Actually, happened with him and two girls so I soon learned to discount his ratings. Now he thought the 9′s in my eyes were gorgeous too but probably would have said they were more like 10′s.

Online I found ratings for SMV to be pretty subjective. (I’ve never heard anyone give a 1-10 rating of attractiveness IRL..) Some of the women I’ve seen rated highly by guys are rather plain.

Likewise, IRL my friends and I have different tastes in guys. Someone they think is hot I may find “meh”, and a guy I think is hot they may not. It’s always makes me laugh, but I think it’s great we don’t go for the same guys.

Overall aside from the handful of people who are considered universally attractive, there’s a lot of variation as to who ranks as a 7, 8, or 9. Personal tastes has quite an influence. YMMV..

http://www.rosehope.com Hope

Re: parasitic women. I think we have gone over this before. Women create life. Men create conditions conducive to life. Those are the roles that enabled humans to survive until now, when various modern advances that men have created are making it easier to stay alive.

But it is very fragile. All it takes is for a critical mass of people to stop vaccinating their kids or for a new mutation to come along on an infectious disease that is deadly but has a longer incubation period, to potentially wipe out a big portion of the population.

Anyway, men who care more about physical, outer beauty over character, empathy and wife/mother qualities are going to find more “parasitic women” who will leech more life than give it. That’s a tough break. There are men who go for a balance and don’t have such complaints, just like women who don’t go after super-alphas then complain about all men.

Kathy

J “Certainly women can not dictate what men find attractive, but our ability to attract a man rests on our ability to understand what men find attractive.”

Susan” The idea that women don’t understand what men want assumes that women are 1) blind: We don’t notice which women get a lot of male attention, and 2) Can’t read: have no access to the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition or Maxim’s Top 100. ”

Yep! We women ain’t stoopid.

I have always been genuinely interested in people, anyway. I am a good listener.

Men like a good listener.

Never had any trouble getting male attention. 😉

Höllenhund

Botticelli’s Venus would probably be rated a 7 today, especially by men that are 9s and 10s. Her tits are too small, thighs too thick, hips too wide for her to be a 9 or 10. The standards of both men and women have changed in 500 years, is that really surprising?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Her tits are too small, thighs too thick, hips too wide for her to be a 9 or 10. The standards of both men and women have changed in 500 years, is that really surprising?

Like I said, you prefer the rexy version on the right.

http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

@ThanksForTheLaughs

… spending some good years in an asylium …

You contagium. You must go to the hospitium, for you hafnium breathium helium … or else you get a eulogium …

Kathy

Well, now we know why you don’t have a woman, HH.

Too picky 😉

Her tits too small etc..?

Not all men care about big tits ya know. 😀

szopen

@Kathy
Exactly I prefer large ass over big tits

Höllenhund

The word ‘parasite’ had meaning when everybody was expected to sacrifice for the common good through marriage, work etc. That no longer happens. Western civilization has been eating the seed corn for 40 years, eating up the wealth created by the bygone patriarchy. Now pretty much everyone is a parasite: the government, NAMs, big corporations, unions, single women, oligarchs etc., sacrificing their future and piling up debt to live beyond their means, here and now. Many PUAs aren’t contributing much to the tax base, but that pretty much applies to everyone else. They aren’t outliners.

Höllenhund

Kathy apparently cannot be bothered to read the comments she’s responding to. What I said was that Botticelli’s Venus would have problems getting into an LTR with a 9 or a 10, because she wouldn’t be considered a 9 or 10. The top men would use her for casual sex, inside or outside soft harems; they wouldn’t wife her up.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

What I said was that Botticelli’s Venus would have problems getting into an LTR with a 9 or a 10, because she wouldn’t be considered a 9 or 10. The top men would use her for casual sex, inside or outside soft harems; they wouldn’t wife her up.

This is perhaps the most bizarre comment ever left on this blog. How is it possible we are dissing Venus as a mere 7? Or even discussing Venus’ SMV?

What’s next, a comment on the low SMV of the Madonna of Bruges?

Höllenhund

” The idea that women don’t understand what men want assumes that women are 1) blind: We don’t notice which women get a lot of male attention, and 2) Can’t read: have no access to the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition or Maxim’s Top 100.”

Most Western women have absolutely no idea how to elicit commitment from the men they’re attracted to. And they won’t learn about this in Maxim or Sports Illustrated.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Most Western women have absolutely no idea how to elicit commitment from the men they’re attracted to.

That’s a different issue. We were talking about SMV, not MMV.

Kathy

“The top men would use her for casual sex, inside or outside soft harems; they wouldn’t wife her up.”

Still not getting it, eh, HH?

Höllenhund

“There are about 60 male “regulars” here, and none of them fits that description. I feel confident that my female readers are getting good and useful information from them.”

1. Anti-feminist beta chumps like deti and Ted who keep trying to logically, analytically explain stuff in a non-offensive way, getting exactly nowhere.
2. The manosphere bloggers and readers who keep returning because you keep picking fights with them.
3. Men like me and Obsidian who cannot be bothered to court your or your readers’ approval; we aren’t here to portray ourselves as good, polite betas; we’re here to preach the truth, telling it like it is.
4. The beta enemies of the manosphere who come here to tell women what they want to hear.

There’s pretty much only one group of males completely absent: the top men that your readers WANT to show up and talk to them in a style that women like. You know, the male unicorns: perfect mix of alpha and beta and all that, “sexy and dependable” (as if something like that actually existed) etc. These are one group that your readers want to interact with online. But they’re nowhere to be seen. What’s your explanation? Your male commenters have one thing in common: they aren’t inducing the tingles. That’s why your readers find them annoying.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@HH

Hmmm, I think you plagiarized this list. Didn’t I see that somewhere as written by deti?

Deti knows the problem. Women at the peak of their SMV do not want to hear cautionary tales from middle aged men who have been unlucky in love. Why would they? They may be non-offensive, but they’re also irrelevant.

2. The manosphere bloggers and readers who keep returning because you keep picking fights with them.

Like on this thread? You, Rollo and yareallypua are here because I picked a fight in this post about Anne and Stephen? I literally do everything in my power to prevent catching the attention of you guys. That was the original intent of not mentioning certain people here – I hoped that if no one ever said their names they would go away. But you guys just can’t quit me. It would be flattering if you all weren’t such a pain in the ass.

3. Men like me and Obsidian who cannot be bothered to court your or your readers’ approval; we aren’t here to portray ourselves as good, polite betas; we’re here to preach the truth, telling it like it is.

No one is listening. Your communication style is so abrasive that everyone tunes out. You announced yourself as an enemy to women years ago.

4. The beta enemies of the manosphere who come here to tell women what they want to hear.

I don’t know what this means. I am not aware of any guys here who are enemies of the manosphere. Some may consider it irrelevant, unhelpful, or even weird.

These are one group that your readers want to interact with online. But they’re nowhere to be seen. What’s your explanation? Your male commenters have one thing in common: they aren’t inducing the tingles.

That is not true. The male readership here runs the gamut from players to virgins. There is actually a fair amount of flirtation that goes on, haha. Quite a few of the guys are very attractive.

However, you’re wrong about who the women want to interact with. Women don’t come to HUS to become aroused by males. They come to solve problems. It’s a place where they can get the unvarnished truth from men, some of whom have credibility. You’ll notice that Anne dismissed you three PUA stooges immediately – none of you has credibility because none of you is remotely attractive in your persona. She paid much closer attention to the feedback from the younger guys and the women.

Kathy

“3. Men like me and Obsidian who cannot be bothered to court your or your readers’ approval; we aren’t here to portray ourselves as good, polite betas; we’re here to preach the truth, telling it like it is.”

Ha ha ha ha ha ha!.

And here I was thinking that the Hellhound was a boring old fart with no sense of humour. 😉

Underdog

@ Susan:

“You cannot separate the two. The intent to manipulate by providing false information is a prerequisite to dread game. Dread game is deceit, a deliberate injury to another person in the interest of personal gain.”

One of my earlier posts:

What if Stephen wanted Anne to be his gf but knew that pursuing her would make her lose attraction but freezing her out / giving her anxiety would spike her attraction level? Would you call that fakery and manipulation?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

What if Stephen wanted Anne to be his gf but knew that pursuing her would make her lose attraction but freezing her out / giving her anxiety would spike her attraction level? Would you call that fakery and manipulation?

Yes I would, and I would also call it bad strategy. Once he has given her anxiety, his LTR value has plummeted. The solution is not to freeze someone out or induce anxiety or jealousy. That reflects an attitude of scarcity. You can’t make it so you’ll fake it. Far more effective is what Stephen actually did, which was nothing more than declining to supplicate.

Höllenhund

The rexy version on the right is too skinny. Good proportions, but still skinny without ass or breasts. A 6 or a 7, definitely not a 10.

Just1Z

@Susan

I wish to complain in the strongest manner. I am, in fact, considering writing to my M.P. (Member of Paliament) to register my utter outrage over your duping of me and the other guys here.

Why did nobody tell me that this was a feminist blog?

I worked out long ago that it wasn’t in the manosphere, the clue being that it never claimed to be in the manosphere.

thanks for
“I’m probably the only honest guy you’ll ever ”meet” on this feminist blog of yours.”

I never knew that this was a fime-nest of iniquity, or that I was a lying twat.

thank the lord that you were here to set me straight on both

Kathy

Heh heh heh.
Just1Z?
You are way to smart to be fooled my friend. 😉

Höllenhund

“How is it possible we are dissing Venus as a mere 7? Or even discussing Venus’ SMV?”

Because you brought up the issue.
Look at any piece of entertainment that is specifically directed at men and features attractive women. Do they look like the medieval Venus? Not 100%. They have bigger tits and more slender bodies. Venus wouldn’t be on the top of the female sexual hierarchy today. In the upper crust, but not the top.

“We were talking about SMV, not MMV.”

Do Anne and your other female readers care about their MMV or their SMV more? You know the answer.

Just1Z

@Kathy
I married my now ex-wife… ’nuff said?

Kathy

Nobody is perfect, mate. Least of all me.
I married my ( first ) now ex- husband, too. 😉

Sai

“I want to hurl when I pass a Victoria’s Secret, for instance”
I still can’t bring myself to go in one. It also seems to me that Bath and Body Works is trying to become more like them, which makes me sad.

I would like to join the other posters asking for more information on developing one’s insides. I have the mental image of smiling too long without meaning it, then quitting because it feels like a lie and glaring the rest of the day to compensate.

@HH
“Now pretty much everyone is a parasite: the government, NAMs, big corporations, unions, single women, oligarchs”
ALL of groups are really parasites? I guess I understand the government part, but… Don’t you contribute if you avoid debt and pay taxes, married or not?

“Your male commenters have one thing in common: they aren’t inducing the tingles. That’s why your readers find them annoying.”
I know I should know this at this point, but what are these tingles and how do we get them online? (Is Ted D that unpopular? I like him…)

So even Venus is just a 7 now… Thanks for your honesty. I mean it. But I’m going to crawl away and eat cake.

(I miss Dr. F., can you tell?)

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

I know I should know this at this point, but what are these tingles and how do we get them online?

Good question. The idea that women read at HUS to tingle alone at their laptops while the males comment is laughable.

Just1Z

@Kathy
actually, I think that that was a little unfair – she wasn’t trying to fool me. she just changed a year or so after marriage.

I shouldn’t have married her either way, but she wasn’t dishonest at the time of marriage.

So, a piccy of your son in the sunshine? (it is a small picture – if I’m wrong, please forgive me!)
we’re on flood alert here (again) luckily I:
a) have plenty of scuba equipment
b) live on a hill

yareallypua

“Yesterday I was baffled by the appearance of PUA types, but it must be this”

lol brilliant hamster spinning. It must be exhausted.

Congratulations, Anne will be taking it up the pooper by a guy who used Game tactics on her. Couldn’t have asked for a better advertisement.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Anne will be taking it up the pooper by a guy who used Game tactics on her.

Classy.

Kathy

Yes I do remember you mentioning that before Just.:-(
Yep that’s my great little 12 year old bloke.
He was out in our back yard helping the fig tree shed it’s renaining few leaves back in June.:-D

Höllenhund

“Hmmm, I think you plagiarized this list. Didn’t I see that somewhere as written by deti?”

I posted the same thing here before but you deleted it.

“Women at the peak of their SMV do not want to hear cautionary tales from middle aged men who have been unlucky in love. Why would they?”

That just proves my point. He isn’t generating attraction, thus women write him off as irrelevant. His one cautionary tale about his lying wife is directed at young men. But all his other arguments are directed at young women, to help them avoid the mistakes that turn women into feminist spinsters.

And they need to hear those arguments.Yeah, they should be packaged into female-speak to get their attention, but they need them nevertheless. From whom will they accept them anyway? Other women at the peak of their SMV? Older women unlucky in love? Or they don’t count either?

Do you have more information about the current SMP than deti or any other similar man of his age? You don’t. You’re not a bit more credible than him. You base your opinion on studies, statistics and anecdotal evidence. Do you think you’re alone with that?

“I literally do everything in my power to prevent catching the attention of you guys.”

You mean like posting criticisms of manosphere arguments? Bringing up topics that you know will get attention from the manosphere first and foremost? Bringing up the manosphere in the comments? Your female commenters do that all the time. Do you ever tell them to stop it? No, you approve of their attitude.

“Your communication style is so abrasive that everyone tunes out.”

Most women do. They would tune out anyway. I could sugarcoat my arguments, fart pink baby unicorns and they’d still recoil. Because the arguments contradict their worldview. But again, I’m not talking to them, I’m talking to you and some men.

“I am not aware of any guys here who are enemies of the manosphere. Some may consider it irrelevant, unhelpful, or even weird.”

What an important distinction. They aren’t its enemies, they merely show up to attack it and your female readers like it. Yeah, it’s really a big difference.

“Women don’t come to HUS to become aroused by males. They come to solve problems. It’s a place where they can get the unvarnished truth from men, some of whom have credibility.”

Which is what I said, in different wording.

That’s your dilemma. There are men out there whom your female readers’d find credible, due to their social status and skills, ample experience in the SMP, attuned to female communication style etc. But they cannot be bothered to come here and tell the unvarnished truth. (As if women wanted to hear that from anyone!) And the only men who tell unvarnished truths are the ones your readers don’t find credible. So the end result is that your readers aren’t getting an inch closer to the truth. They just keep confirming each other’s emotions in circles.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@HH

He isn’t generating attraction, thus women write him off as irrelevant.

No, he’s irrelevant because he knows nothing of the SMP.

But all his other arguments are directed at young women, to help them avoid the mistakes that turn women into feminist spinsters.

He’s so wrong so much of the time that his advice is not useful. He has no knowledge of female mistakes or how to avoid them.

Do you have more information about the current SMP than deti or any other similar man of his age? You don’t. You’re not a bit more credible than him.

Google Analytics says otherwise. The proof is in my results.

Bringing up topics that you know will get attention from the manosphere first and foremost? Bringing up the manosphere in the comments? Your female commenters do that all the time.

My blog is centered on a topic that gets attention from the sphere. I’m not going to tailor my content to appease them. It’s true that people often bring up the sphere in comments, and it’s not just females. Most of the men do as well. I don’t instigate it, but I generally let comment threads go where they will if people are being civil.

There are men out there whom your female readers’d find credible, due to their social status and skills, ample experience in the SMP, attuned to female communication style etc. But they cannot be bothered to come here and tell the unvarnished truth.

There are men like that on this thread right now. You don’t recognize them because they don’t share your version of the truth.

Russ in Texas

@Underdog#317:

That’s risible, and is predicated upon valuing tool over purpose.

Intent COUNTS.

Lokland

@Susan

“This is perhaps the most bizarre comment ever left on this blog. How is it possible we are dissing Venus as a mere 7? Or even discussing Venus’ SMV?”

I prefer the one on the right.
Neither are what I would consider much above a 7.

I’ve been rubber necking on this thread since it seems like you already have enough to deal with. But I figured a good chuckle might help. But Sweet Ted?! I’m going to cut and paste that for the next time we get into a tiff. 😛

“The idea that women don’t understand what men want assumes that women are 1) blind: We don’t notice which women get a lot of male attention”

Not at all. However I’d wager that other than pure sex appeal (physical beauty) and “sluttiness” (her willingness to sex up guys quickly) most woman wouldn’t know why any particular woman does well with the guys. Do they realize that perhaps she is a very sweet person? Very sensual? Sends lots of easy to see IOI’s?

“2) Can’t read: have no access to the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition or Maxim’s Top 100.”

Susan really? Are you even suggesting that popular magazines give good relationship advice? I have yet to see any mainstream publication print something other than “50 ways to rock his world in bed!” Of course, perhaps you meant women can SEE what men want? If so, then you’d still be mistaken for many of us out here. I don’t prefer the build of a typical model, even the ones in SI swimsuit addition. I will admit that Maxim does a better job of finding curvy women, but most of them are still far too scrawny. (not to mention scrawny with fake boobs, which to me looks totally ridiculous.)

“You cannot separate the two. The intent to manipulate by providing false information is a prerequisite to dread game. Dread game is deceit, a deliberate injury to another person in the interest of personal gain.”

Why does it have to be false information? I mean, I can “run dread game” simply by hitting on another woman when my wife is around. (not saying I would ever intentionally do that!) And FWIW, I still see pulling away emotionally in a relationship as a form of “dread game”, because the idea is to induce dread in her that you might be checking out. (again, not something I would do as a preemptive measure, but something I would DAMN SURE do if my wife started treating me poorly)

DREAD GAME is instilling a sense of fear of loss in your mate. That can be done for good or bad purposes, and it can be done by deceit or legitimate measures. It is a tool. How you USE that tool is what makes it good/evil. This guy may not have intended to run dread game, but the truth is he did it to an extent, by causing Anna to “dread” losing him. I don’t think it WAS intentional on his part, but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t have worked if it was…

Re: Kate Upton – yuck. She may be pretty, but that pic of her in a bathing suit was a turn off for me. She just isn’t curvy enough. (in fact, my first thought was that she was about as curvy as a 15yo boy. LOL)

Lokland – “This should speak volumes to the women about how men were raised.
What the ladies are defining as self-respect men are defining as evil/dread inducing.”

+1

Russ in Texas – “Unlike HanSolo, I’m NOT a sympathetic and empathetic guy at heart: I have busted my ASS to develop those traits, and even I can see the distinction between:
Instilling dread of relationship loss as a *reaction* to shitty behavior
Instilling dread of relationship loss as a proactive emotional manipulation
#1 is called “I’m not putting up with puerile shit.”
#2 is called “treating your woman like shit.”

Exactly. I, like you, seem to be pretty lacking in the empathy department and have had to learn it, which I still believe is NOT as good as the real thing. (naturally occurring) However, it does make it easier for me to look at a situation without a ton of emotional baggage, and I think your two points are pretty straight forward. If you are using ‘dread’ as a preemptive means of “keeping your woman in line”, you are a douche. If however, you are using ‘dread’ because a woman is treating you like crap, then to me it is totally justified. IF this guy was using dread (and I’m not sure he was intentionally using anything…) Anne’s behavior prompted it, and it was justified.

J – “You know, I truly question this. Certainly women can not dictate what men find attractive, but our ability to attract a man rests on our ability to understand what men find attractive. Any women who has attracted a good guy, locked him down and held on to him for an extended period of time has a pretty good idea of what like”

Eh, I don’t know. If we stripped away all of our learned behaviors and beliefs and went back to living on instinct, we’d still be pairing up and having sex. I think many women (and men) CAN attract a mate, but do they actually know HOW they did so? I can tell you I had no clue of what attracted my ex-wife to me, or I’d NEVER have stopped being that person. I think more often than not, love is a matter of luck simply because most of us have NO IDEA past some very basic principles of what the other sex wants.

I wouldn’t say I’m getting nowhere. I realize I’m often banging my head against a brick wall, but deep down I must enjoy it, because I keep coming back for more. Truth is, I learned a lot about myself and my beliefs by doing so. And I learned a bit about what I can/should expect from the women in my life should I ever decide to go “public” with this stuff. By that I mean, I’ve learned that very few woman will even accept the Red Pill and will remain plugged in to the Matrix. Of those that can be unplugged, most won’t accept the alternative view men tend to get from being unplugged. Much of it is just too harsh for their delicate sensibilities. Put another way, women DO NOT want to know what’s behind the curtain, as long as the show is good.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Ted

But Sweet Ted?! I’m going to cut and paste that for the next time we get into a tiff.

Haha, I planted that just for you.

Of course, perhaps you meant women can SEE what men want? If so, then you’d still be mistaken for many of us out here. I don’t prefer the build of a typical model, even the ones in SI swimsuit addition.

Yes, that is what I meant. Obviously, there will be some variation in taste, but the popularity, i.e. profitability of those issues makes it clear that most men share their taste.

Why does it have to be false information? I mean, I can “run dread game” simply by hitting on another woman when my wife is around.

You’re missing the point about dread game. It’s not your hitting on other women that creates dread (though I’m sure she wouldn’t appreciate it), it’s other women coming after you. That’s the main reason I think this tactic is low value. A woman whose husband has options, or who women find attractive in general, is well aware of it. Acting creepy and inappropriate with other people’s wives just humiliates your wife, it doesn’t make her want to give you a blow job.

Underdog

@Susan

“Yes I would, and I would also call it bad strategy. Once he has given her anxiety, his LTR value has plummeted. The solution is not to freeze someone out or induce anxiety or jealousy. That reflects an attitude of scarcity. You can’t make it so you’ll fake it. Far more effective is what Stephen actually did, which was nothing more than declining to supplicate.”

It seems that you are now denying the necessity and effectiveness of game in general. Had Stephen pursued Anne further after she’s been so rude to him, he would’ve been labeled as a desperate, creepy stalker with low SMV chasing after a girl who deleted him off Facebook; and Anne would’ve no doubt viewed him in a lesser light. Instead, he declined to supplicate by freezing her out.

And if memory serves me, a great deal of comments made by you and others here alluded to the perception that Stephen had high SMV, had options, was LTR material, etc. simply because he cut off contacts and gave Anne a great deal of anxiety.

There is only one difference between Stephen using dread and a PUA using dread: Stephen used dread as a response to bad behavior while a PUA would use dread to keep attraction constant — even if the girl didn’t deserve it.

I’ll admit that Stephen’s intent (if is was his intention) was more “fair” than a PUA’s. But their tactics were the same — giving a girl anxiety causes her to think more highly of you and spikes her attraction level.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Underdog

Stephen did not “freeze her out.” He responded to all of her texts. All he did was not supplicate to a woman who appeared to be losing interest.

Self-respect /= dread. Heaven help you if you really can’t see the difference.

Ted D

Sai – “(Is Ted D that unpopular? I like him…)”

LOL no worries. HH and many other ‘sphere regulars think I’m either a fool wasting my time, or a mangina trying to “save all the wimmenz” because I keep pleading my case to deaf ears.

I don’t think he was implying I’m not liked, he was implying that I’m brushed off and ignored, which may largely be true. Honestly I don’t care. 😛

Just1Z

@Sai
if you’re going to listen to crazy guys on the web, can I suggest that you stick to Marellus and myself?

Höllenhund

Yes, Ted, that’s what I think. Women see you as a loser in the SMP, and thus consider your opinions on this issue irrelevant. Of course, even if you were a winner in the SMP or even the MMP, women may still find you irrelevant if you contradict their feeeeelings. Athol Kay has more than one online female enemies, for example.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

Sue: “Do you have any idea how agentic/narcissistic this sounds? It’s all about you and what you can “get” from other people.”

I think there are two types of kind people: chumps who take it on the chin, and people who are high-value enough that they’ll be treated kindly back, pretty much no matter what they do.

I told you, I am trying to improve my narcissism, as it’s really underdeveloped. As parcel of that, it means self-development to fit into the latter category. Until then, all one can do is play tit-for-tat.

People on the higher end, or even just above-average, really do experience a completely different universe or something… it’s fascinating to watch.

Höllenhund

By the way, Ted, just to give you another example, you may recall our old pal Brendan who commented here but at one point said on TFAMP’s blog it’s no use doing so anymore so he stopped. There was a time when Susan agreed with his arguments and pimped him as the perfect spokesperson of the Manosphere (or the MRM or whatever).

But then he started making arguments she didn’t like. So she decided he’s irrelevant, because he’s a middle-aged, divorced man with bad experiences with women, and hasn’t been active in the hook-up scene for two decades or so.

Of course, it was never a secret that he’s a divorced, middle-aged man. But as long as he made “acceptable” arguments, it didn’t matter. But as soon as he stopped doing that, suddenly it mattered.

See?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

you may recall our old pal Brendan who commented here but at one point said on TFAMP’s blog it’s no use doing so anymore so he stopped.

No, he specifically said that he would not participate because he disapproved of my asking people not to refer to or link to certain other bloggers, men that he respects.

Brendan has commented here recently. I wouldn’t call him a regular by any means, but he obviously reads and does comment from time to time.

But then he started making arguments she didn’t like. So she decided he’s irrelevant, because he’s a middle-aged, divorced man with bad experiences with women, and hasn’t been active in the hook-up scene for two decades or so.

Not true. I treat Brendan with respect and am interested to know his POV. He has an excellent understanding of gender dynamics, though I don’t agree with him on everything. I view him as far more objective than deti, and far more knowledgeable. He is also very civil and reasonable in debate, which helps his cause.

Russ in Texas

@Ted#366:

Yeah; working on it HARD, and my wife, who’s a naturally hyper-empathic type, helps a ton. My saving grace is that I’m actually far below normal levels of narcissism. So I’m a weirdo who truly wants the best for everybody around me, but has moderate-poor empathy and not the slightest problem putting a hatchet through somebody’s mouth if that’s what needs to happen. The first part is great; the latter? Well, part of being a grownup is the ability to say “see those people over there? They’re better people than I am.” That’s a leap too far for a narcissist.

MOST men and women are actually pretty awesome, if you give them a chance and aren’t afraid of their rough spots. Time and time again, if we move forward upon a presumption of good intentions, people will surprise us — positively. (A former Reagan staffer once referred to me as the most cynical man he’d ever met, so it’s not like I’m an easy judge here). PUAs seem to be running with a pop-sociology that we’re all neck-deep-in-dystopia. That’s wrong. We definitely have problems (as anybody who’s been raped, or divorce-raped, knows), but MOST people are neither parasites, nor evil.

The problem with HH (cf#363) is that he accepts the necessity of tailoring speech to the customer, but disdains it as purple farts and unicorns.
By doing so he explicitly disrespects his audience, yet wants their attention. That’s, um, “sub-optimal.”

The vast (VAST) majority of women who run evil, relationship-destroying poop on men do not do so because they wish to be bloodsoaked erinyes feeding on the shattered hearts of the naive. They do so because they’re narcissistic, immature, or have gotten **REALLY SHITTY RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.**

A narcissist is a falling knife — there’s no point trying to catch that person, unless you enjoy fruitless bleeding. The latter two groups, on the other hand, can be helped.

Lokland

@HH

“Women see you as a loser in the SMP, and thus consider your opinions on this issue irrelevant.”

This is generally a good way to look at it.

If a woman doesn’t want to date a certain type of guy, its best not to listen to that type of guy.

I do agree though, as a general rule if a woman isn’t attracted, she won’t consider your opinion. That extends beyond this blog though.

Lokland

@OTC

“People on the higher end, or even just above-average, really do experience a completely different universe or something… it’s fascinating to watch.”

+1

Just a thought, your never going to get this message through to those who have never experienced being the one who does more giving than taking in life.

Russ in Texas

Oh, Ted. Thumbs-up on the Schlachta thing, btw. Pretty decent chance we actually know some people in common.

Russ in Texas

Sai: I don’t know about your “insides” issue, but for me, what was very helpful was reading up on Emotional Intelligence.

It sounds all kinds of corporate-stupid, but I was pleasantly surprised once I got into it in some depth and realized it was quite scientifically based, and very effective. And a ton easier than doing 60 hours of zazen (which seems to get one to a similar place: the old adage “know thyself” seems to have legs).

Ted D

HH – “Women see you as a loser in the SMP, and thus consider your opinions on this issue irrelevant. Of course, even if you were a winner in the SMP or even the MMP, women may still find you irrelevant if you contradict their feeeeelings. Athol Kay has more than one online female enemies, for example.”

Well being in the company of Athol doesn’t seem so bad! And I don’t care if every other woman in the world sees me as a “loser”, I’m happy with the woman I have, and I know beyond all doubt that if I had to, I could find another woman that wouldn’t see me as a loser at all. To be frank, if I wasn’t happily attached I’d probably be coming at this from a totally different perspective. But, at this point the only dog I have in the fight is my kids, so for me this is all mostly academic.

“Of course, it was never a secret that he’s a divorced, middle-aged man. But as long as he made “acceptable” arguments, it didn’t matter. But as soon as he stopped doing that, suddenly it mattered.
See?”

Yep, I get it. I realize that to a 22yo woman I probably look like an old crazy man yelling at kids to get off my lawn. But you know what? That is their mistake and loss. It is the curse of youth that they simply won’t listen to those that have made mistakes before them, because of course THEY are special snowflakes, and we were raised before electricity was invented. 😛

Lokland – “If a woman doesn’t want to date a certain type of guy, its best not to listen to that type of guy.”

Strangely enough, this is why I feel like women SHOULD listen to Deti, Desi (although he has vacated the premises), and even myself. On paper I appear to be most of what women claim to want in a man: dependable, caring, protective, reliable, secure, blah blah blah… And, it seems I have much in common with the likes of Cooper and INTJ, who by all appearances should be cleaning up with the ladies. So, it seems to me that IF woman want the Coopers of the world, they SHOULD be listening to the OLDER Coopers of the world when they explain how screwed up stuff is. If they want to truly be happy with a guy like me, they should probably figure out what makes a guy like me tick.

Now, if they think I’m actually a loser? No harm, no foul. I’ve got my kids, a wife, and a relatively good life. So whether or not they listen won’t hurt my feelings. It really is their loss.

Damien Vulaume

Geee…….The return of the stone age phallocracy triad, aka Don Tomassi and Sancho Jareally-oink, riding a hollenhorse, on their new crusade to preaching misogyny. And now this thankforthelaughter. Quest ion for all out here: Do you have special laboratories were you breed them overthere?

@thanksforthelaughter.
Your comments on women sound eerily close to these ones:
“All the women of Belton are venimous vipers! See what you did to me?!”
“Hiding from me, bitch?”
“It’s payback day!!”
“Take that, bitch!”
-G. Hennard, on oct 16, 1991, sipping coffee at Luby’s cafeteria.
Keep up your mental state as such, and you’ll be in his company somewhere.

@HUS: Is this Roissy’s dread game roadmap for real??? So that’s what’s this manosphere everybody was mentioning advocates? This is nothing else than an ABC for sadism.
I’ve got an entertaining solution for all the likes of Thanksfor and Valerie Solanas: Let’s distribute guns to them all and lock them in together in a stadium…Who knows, maybe they’ll start dancing polka together.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Damien

@HUS: Is this Roissy’s dread game roadmap for real??? So that’s what’s this manosphere everybody was mentioning advocates? This is nothing else than an ABC for sadism.

That’s just the start. Unfortunately, Roissy deleted his most overtly sadistic posts so I can’t link to them. I do recall his stating that he enjoys making bitches writhe in pain as he penetrates them anally.

Re his dread post, most men will excuse it by saying, “Haha, that is satire.” I don’t buy it, as he references the need for dread almost continuously. Some of the advice is very peculiar – in a recent post about how to be playful in a way that will make women tingle, he recommended putting a sign on her back in the morning that says “kick me.” I haven’t seen a male do that since my babysitting days.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Rollo

The first thing I should make clear is that I view Roissy’s post as the defining one on Dread Game. Yours is derivative. Second, this essay on Dread, while objectionable, is not the one I recall where you specifically talked about instigating anxiety and jealousy in Mrs. Tomassi by flirting with other women in her presence. I believe you sprinkled a lot of “heh heh”s around in that one. I’m not going to go looking for it, I don’t even know whether it is still up.

I have always maintained that deliberately provoking jealousy or anxiety in a loved one is unacceptable because you are inflicting pain for personal gain – to keep the upper hand. Such manipulative tactics prevent healthy relationships.

I also find Dread lame from a strategic standpoint – the women who will reward Roissy’s tactics are the same women who stay with men who beat them. To any woman with healthy self-esteem – not excessive, but healthy – such obvious schoolboy tactics are a massive DLV.

And while we can debate the details of what constitutes a ‘natural’, what you can’t debate is the effectiveness and the validity of the behaviors he displayed. By posting this situation and your own take on it, you’ve validated the underlying dynamics of Game, regardless of whether Steven intended to use it or not.

Stephen has tight Game, no question, and I acknowledged both the effectiveness and the reasonableness of his behavior and responses. I am hardly opposed to men exercising self-respect and refusing to supplicate. If you want to call that Game, it’s fine with me.

Where I draw the line is in characterizing Stephen’s behavior as deliberately manipulative or designed to instill dread. There was no arbitrary break in communication like Roissy recommends – he simply stopped communicating when she demonstrated a lack of interest. He knew better than to go begging. Has it come to that? Not begging = Game?

By my reading of Anne’s letter (judiciously edited for publication) he has never negged her, flirted with another woman in front of her, ignored her, used push pull, attempted to sexually escalate with dominance, held back in expressing how much he likes her, or otherwise “gamed” her. It’s clear from her recent comments that she believes your claims are way off the mark.

Ted D

Damien Vulaume – Don’t make any judgements about the “manosphere” based purely on comments here. If you want an objective view, my suggestion is go read for yourself and decide.

I’ve said before that I can see kernals of truth in the ‘sphere, but much of it is wrapped in bitterness and anger. And keep in mind, Roissy is pretty much 100% PUA, so his writing will be harsh and directed at guys who’s primary goal in life is to bet laid. If you aren’t concerned with how you treat others, the path of least resistance in getting more sex is pretty simple, and “dread game” as presented by him reflects that.

However, that DOES NOT mean that “dread game” is NOT a useful tool for men that want nothing more than to get and stay happily married. It is a tool like any other, and the morality of it comes down to how you USE that tool. I disagree with Susan when it comes to “dread”, because I can see it as something I *could* use if the occasion presented itself. If my wife for some reason started treating me poorly, “dread” might be one tool I’d use to rectify the situation. I don’t walk around looking for ways to make her fearful or upset, but I like having options, and “dread” is just one of many options I’d have available should the need arise.

Be warned: you’ll find a LOT of harsh stuff in the ‘sphere. If you decide to educate yourself on it, do your best to set aside your personal feelings on the issues and look at them objectively. Some of this stuff still upsets my “delicate sensibilities”, but that doesn’t mean they are wrong. It simply means that my goals do not align with the uses prescribed for the tool in question.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

If my wife for some reason started treating me poorly, “dread” might be one tool I’d use to rectify the situation.

But that is not how Dread game is peddled. It is recommended as a preventative strategy – a way to keep your woman on her toes so that you never have to worry about being treated poorly.

Ted D

Susan – “Where I draw the line is in characterizing Stephen’s behavior as deliberately manipulative or designed to instill dread. ”

But the point you are missing is: even IF Stephen was not intentionally running “dread game”, the results he got WOULD BE THE SAME if he was doing it intentionally. His behavior does tend to show how effective dread game can be. Whether or not it is morally acceptable to do so is a completely different matter. And, since you try to stay away from morality conversations, I find it odd that you seem to be taking it in that direction…

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

even IF Stephen was not intentionally running “dread game”, the results he got WOULD BE THE SAME if he was doing it intentionally.

We don’t know what his results would be, because he didn’t do anything to provoke anxiety or jealousy. He simply told Anne to contact him when she wanted to see him. She did not do that until yesterday, and he expressed strong interest in getting together.

All Stephen did was not be a pussy. Good for him, but calling that instilling dread or making her squirm is silly. He simply refused to supplicate and put the ball in her court. She resisted, but after reading here did take the initiative.

This post has nothing to do with Game. If anything, it addresses Girl Game, which is emotional escalation, something that Anne needs to do pronto.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Ted

Whether or not it is morally acceptable to do so is a completely different matter. And, since you try to stay away from morality conversations, I find it odd that you seem to be taking it in that direction…

I avoid conversations about whether sex is moral. I do not stay away from conversations about treating others with respect and honesty. If I did, I would hamstring myself and be unable to warn women about cads, a large part of what I find necessary.

LJ

“I also find Dread lame from a strategic standpoint – the women who will reward Roissy’s tactics are the same women who stay with men who beat them. To any woman with healthy self-esteem – not excessive, but healthy – such obvious schoolboy tactics are a massive DLV.”

Yes — any woman with healthy self-esteem/ self-respect would dump a man on the spot for trying any of that stuff in the Roissy article. But those women aren’t their target population, are they?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

Ted: “On paper I appear to be most of what women claim to want in a man […] And, it seems I have much in common with the likes of Cooper and INTJ, who by all appearances should be cleaning up with the ladies.”

As you correctly observe, that means nothing. And they (rightly) won’t listen to Cooper, who ARE their age. To have them listen to you, requires future time-orientation, which few people have.

The only way is for someone to make them feel good and then slyly deliver the message, suitably encoded. Either Susan can do that, or men like Jason can do that. Your SMV is your credibility.

LJ

“But the point you are missing is: even IF Stephen was not intentionally running “dread game”, the results he got WOULD BE THE SAME if he was doing it intentionally. His behavior does tend to show how effective dread game can be. ”

You really think that if Stephen were actually an insecure guy, clueless about women, trying to follow a script he read on a website to build up his “notch” count … that Anne wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between that and a confident, secure guy whose looking for a healthy relationship with a woman who treats him well?

Ted D

OTC – all true. Again, it’s their loss. But they can’t say later they didn’t know, or at least that no one tried to tell them. It doesn’t matter to me whether or not anyone thinks I’m “credible” since most of what I write is opinion based. Thing is, it seems there are plenty of younger men that agree with my POV, and if women want those men, they’ll need to figure out what those men want and need.

Damien Vulaume

@Ted D:
No thanks, I don’t need their teachings, nor do I feel the need to turn into some low grade hunter looking for bimbos. I’m quite a player myself, or, rather, I was. But not the kind they want to breed at Roissy or elsewhere. I gave a look at that manosphere, and while few but some of their strategic advices are sound, I verified that myself, most of it is however based on misogynous assumptions. I’m not even talking about the comments you find there…By comparison, Sancho yareally sounds like a preachy lilly advocating christian love between brothers and sisters.

Some of the most LTR-successful guys that I know are both attractive and *almost* ambivalent about whether or not they have sex with their girlfriends/wives or fap off to porn. They don’t tell their partners about this nonchalance, but it’s apparently an important aspect of how they retain hand. I suppose that it’s the monogamous guy’s equivalent of having multiple sexual options.

This is how the skilled STR and LTR men can have similar negotiation styles: both have very high BATNAs and can walk away from a bad deal at any time. When a player does it, the woman knows that he could be sexting the cocktail waitress on the way home. When the LTR guy does it, the woman may not know that he is going to pour himself a Scotch and have a satisfying pull or two, and then enjoy a clear-headed, private serenity for a few hours.

Chronically under-discussed, strategic masturbation may truly be man’s best friend. Like an anger management practice that has someone count to 10 before responding to an insult or an SAS commando team putting a brew on before making important mission-planning decisions, the strategic fapper may take a momentary time-out to jack it before responding to relationship tensions. He can then act from a position of personal strength, satiety, perhaps even ironic detachment/amusement.

It’s difficult to manipulate a guy like that. He isn’t putting on a facade of non-neediness while secretly being obsessed with sexual validation; after blasting himself off, he just doesn’t give a damn. I suppose that this is probably aided by having an overarching personal obsession of the intellectual or aesthetic variety—antiquarian books, sculpting, collecting rare butterflies, martial arts, whatever.

Ted D

Susan – “That’s the main reason I think this tactic is low value. A woman whose husband has options, or who women find attractive in general, is well aware of it.”

Right. I agree actually. The thing is, sometimes GF/Wives forget that their man IS indeed attractive to other women, and that they should probably make sure he is happy WITH HER before he moves on. And in this particular thread, we were discussing a “budding” relationship, so she would hardly KNOW if Stephen was or was not “in demand” other than in a general sense. I don’t think she has any doubt now, do you?

LJ – “You really think that if Stephen were actually an insecure guy, clueless about women, trying to follow a script he read on a website to build up his “notch” count … that Anne wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between that and a confident, secure guy whose looking for a healthy relationship with a woman who treats him well?”

I don’t understand why you think Stephen would have to be “insecure” to run dread game? I’m sure we can all agree that many PUA types are indeed insecure, but it would be a mistake to assume they all are. I’d argue that many are probably OVERLY confident. However, as has been pointed out many times, being overly confident rarely works against a guy if his goal is to get laid. And as far as if Anne could tell? That depends largely on how self-aware she is, and how well she understands her own motivations. You do realize that game is a combination of “aping” successful men’s strategies, and using a woman’s own “nature” against her, right? It is the latter part that depends largely on a woman’s self-awareness.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Ted

And in this particular thread, we were discussing a “budding” relationship, so she would hardly KNOW if Stephen was or was not “in demand” other than in a general sense. I don’t think she has any doubt now, do you?

She stated that she finds him exceedingly attractive and assumes other women do too. She trusts her own judgment enough to know that a guy she is hot for would appeal to others. She does not need a demonstration of social proof. In fact, she states that she gets grief for falling for less attractive men. She appears to discount preselection entirely.

If anything, Stephen ran the risk here as coming across as a player. She didn’t want it to work out if he was running Game on her. She wrote to me after she saw a comment I made that I hear Jekyll and Hyde stories about men who seemingly change overnight in order to manipulate the women they are seeing, and she was initially worried that is what he was doing. It was after I defended his actions and suggested she take responsibility that she returned to seeing him as a dad rather than a cad.

I do think that Stephen’s refusing to put up with her shit strengthened his position – he finally passed her shit tests.

Ted D

Susan – “But that is not how Dread game is peddled. It is recommended as a preventative strategy – a way to keep your woman on her toes so that you never have to worry about being treated poorly.”

I realize this. But, if someone was selling hammers as a weapon, would it make them any less effective at putting nails in wood? You are too focused on one way dread can/should be used, and missing the fact that it IS a multi-use tool. I would never run dread as Roissy suggests, but I’d be a fool to simply disregard it as a tool simply because i don’t like the way he pounds in his nails.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

You are too focused on one way dread can/should be used, and missing the fact that it IS a multi-use tool.

If my husband was treating me poorly, I could start flirting with other men to make him anxious. Now we’re both pissed off. Or I could say the following:

“I feel that you are taking me for granted and treating me poorly. You don’t show appreciation or respect for me in this relationship. I find that I don’t enjoy your company much these days. I hope you can find a way to adjust your attitude, because I am not willing to remain in a relationship where I am not valued.”

Now I feel that I have honestly shared my concern as well as my injury. He will know that his poor treatment has been noted and will not be tolerated. He is free to change or end the relationship. If he’s prepared to end it, dread would have done nothing at all but increase misery all around. If he is prepared to change, we can begin the process of communication, forgiveness, and move toward a much healthier dynamic.

Dread is NEVER the way to go.

Ted D

Susan – and to add… This is where I think we often go astray. Just because someone tells me I should use tool X in a specific manner, does NOT mean I must use it as directed. I fully believe that each and every person should look at the tools available, and choose what is useful to them, and what is not. Along with that, I think they should ALWAYS decide if the tool should be used as intended, or if it serves other purposes.

I think you get all tied up because of how some men suggest “dread” should be used. Just because their interpretation of the tools use goes against your sensibilities, does NOT mean you can’t use the tool at all.

Russ in Texas

@Bastiat Blogger.

Not being a “hormone with feet,” it’s actually much simpler than that: if my wife or a ltr partner is behaving poorly, that’s an admirable time to work on chores or one of my various personal projects (of which, like most worthwhile men, I have FAR too many) until such a time as she’s got her head on straight and we can talk objectively. (Or until *mine* is clear enough that I realize “hey dude, you just stepped on your crank and owe her an apology”)

Lokland

“All Stephen did was not be a pussy. Good for him, but calling that instilling dread or making her squirm is silly. He simply refused to supplicate and put the ball in her court. She resisted, but after reading here did take the initiative.”

I mentioned this before and it was promptly ignored but,

For some portion of men self-respect is the equivalent of dread game.
Or at least
Thats what their mothers, teacher and society in general told them.

Which is probably a decent portion of the reason we are in this mess to begin with.

Guys to scared to approach women.

Underdog

@Susan

This is how I see your argument:

– Making a girl feel dread because she was rude to you = good.
– Making a girl feel dread because you want her to like you = bad.

Once again, your disapproval is not one of tactics, but intent. You approve of the guy who’s making the girl anxious when she has the potential for a relationship with him, which would serve her sexual strategy. But when his mating strategy differs, and he’s using dread to serve his own imperative — you dismiss and shame it as “insecurity” and manipulation.

If you truly despised dread game, then you would’ve told Anne to dump him because he’s caused her too much anxiety — but instead you told her to go crawling back on her hands and knees.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Underdog

he’s using dread to serve his own imperative

This is where you are going astray. He served his own needs by extricating himself from a situation that he perceived had no further benefit. He walked away, and not in hope that she would chase.

He demonstrated real indifference, with no intent to generate a certain response in her. I think he wrote her off.

No tactics were used. He simply took care of himself.

LJ

“I don’t understand why you think Stephen would have to be “insecure” to run dread game?”

Because why would someone who is secure and confident BOTHER playing a game like deliberately turning your phone off for 4 days so you’re GF can’t contact you? A secure person puts their genuine self out there, and is willing to face the possibility of rejection, because they only want to be with someone who genuinely wants to be with them, and if one woman isn’t that person another will be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

BB: I laughed a lot at that, and am reminded of the “loaded gun” scene in Something About Mary.

But I think you might have it backwards, the porn isn’t the cause, but the effect of that frame. Some men are denied sex and only use porn, and this obviously doesn’t count if they are still begging for scraps.

It does, however, explain why women often get SO angry when her man masturbates, even if she unapologetically does it herself (fairness means nothing in emotional matters, it feels wrong). Loss of control.

As for the Roissy article, I just read that in context – a way to maintain hand in high-conflict MTRs and flings. Which, sorry to say, happens. What the hell does Roissy know about LTRs? Might as well go to omegavirginrevolt for advice on how to get laid.

Russ in Texas

What Steve did is fundamentally different from what Roissy links. Lokland phrased it fairly poorly the first time, but his point is quite valid.

Steve said “ball’s in your court.” Does that instill dread? Yes, if the woman is paying attention AND wants the attention, because it says “this relationship is in jeopardy, and any fix is predicated upon YOU stepping up.” If it’s not yet an exclusive relationship, going out with somebody else for a while sends that exact same message.

But it’s nothing even vaguely resembling what Roissy apparently advocates. Men should not regard what Steven did as anything special, and Lokland’s quite right to point this out.

http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

Russ, you have a sound approach. I still have a raging sex drive and frequently need a quick pull before I can relax enough to switch gears.

Every man really needs a Safe Room, if not a Safe House…Batcave, Fortress of Solitude, Tony Stark’s private lab, etc. At a minimum, it should be equipped with secure access (I recommend Medeco locks), high-quality porn/sports-viewing equipment, sound system, heavy bag(s), a well-stocked bar area, a microwave, and adequate workshop tables and shelving for hobbies and interests.

Russ in Texas

(jeez did I just butcher that poor guy’s name. bad me)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

Lok: “For some portion of men self-respect is the equivalent of dread game.
Or at least Thats what their mothers, teacher and society in general told them.”

Bingo. Ignoring a badly-behaving woman is easily categorized as “emotional abuse” if you actually ask a typical woman steeped in feminism. If Anne asked anyone else, ANYONE, the response would be you-go-girl, he’s-an-asshole. Posted on Facebook, a forum, any advice column anywhere, or in person.

The deltas then see this behavior critique, internalize it, try to mold themselves in what women say they want and… become pussies in the process.

Is this clear yet??

Lokland

“Men should not regard what Steven did as anything special, and Lokland’s quite right to point this out.”

Victory achieved
Someone finally understands.

What Stephen did is not special or dread instilling. Its normal.
The fact that a bunch of guys believe it instills dread speaks volumes on how those men were raised.

Damien Vulaume

Re: “If my wife for some reason started treating me poorly, “dread” might be one tool I’d use to rectify the situation.”
Really? If a woman starts treating you poorly, that means that she starts pity you, and pity for a man in a woman’s mind is never far from irreversible scorn. Why not then simply divorce instead of bending the situation backward with sadistic tactics or worse, sheer brutality.

Ted D

LJ – “Because why would someone who is secure and confident BOTHER playing a game like deliberately turning your phone off for 4 days so you’re GF can’t contact you?”

Because it works. Plain and simple.

OTC – “The deltas then see this behavior critique, internalize it, try to mold themselves in what women say they want and… become pussies in the process.”

+1

Russ in Texas

Bastiat,

I disagree. If me withdrawing across the house to quietly fold laundry in the bedroom and then get shit done in the back yard does not send that message, no amount of “man cave” will. (ymmv, but in my relationship this is actually a “nuclear” move — this is “you’ve fucked up so badly that I’m not even interested in talking to you” and will frequently produce tears if she’s the one at fault — and proFUSE apologies if I am). Locks and crap says “mine, you can’t get in.” That’s counter-productive and sends a very bad message abou the nature of a relationship.

At the end of the day, the fix isn’t to retreat-and-consolidate like armies in the field: it’s to address the issue, solve it, and move forward without leaving any wounds or scars.

Russ in Texas

Yeah, Ted loses me there. If I turn my cell off for four days so I can’t be reached, I’m the one being an asshole, by saying “I don’t even CARE if you get your head back on straight.”

Exactly. And the low quality woman will stick around and hate you for it.

Ted D

DV – “Really? If a woman starts treating you poorly, that means that she starts pity you, and pity for a man in a woman’s mind is never far from irreversible scorn. Why not then simply divorce instead of bending the situation backward with sadistic tactics or worse, sheer brutality.”

This largely depends on how poorly she is treating you, and how long you let it go on. I largely agree with you, so don’t think I’m trying to be obtuse. But the truth is, not all people are self aware enough to recognize any of this. I can’t conceive of any situation where “dread game” would be my goto tool with my wife. Before I go there, I’d probably take a route similar to Susan’s suggestion above. But, that is because my wife is rather reasonable and logical for a woman (sorry easy dig ladies, mean as humor!) and I believe she would take what I said and understand the urgency. However, my ex-wife would NOT have been this simple to communicate with. If I had run “dread game” on her, we might still be married. Now I’m not complaining, because I’m happy where I am now, but I can’t deny the fact that my first marriage would have very likely survived IF I’d gamed my ex-wife.

Of course, the easier solution is to simply avoid women that need lots of game, but just how many of those women exist is up for much debate. And, I’ll add that in the younger age brackets, such a woman would indeed be a unicorn.

Underdog

@Susan

He had no choice but to walk away, doing anything else would have lowered his SMV. I wont assume wether or not he wanted her to chase him but it doesn’t matter, what matters is that he caused her to feel dread and thus became more attractive in her eyes — and in yours, also.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

he caused her to feel dread and thus became more attractive in her eyes — and in yours, also.

Haha, in mine? I simply respect his straightforward approach to not tolerating poor treatment. I assume he has been quite attractive all along – she thinks so. She even thought so when she was flaking – which is where the beautiful woman entitlement issues come in.

Ted D

Russ in Texas – “Yeah, Ted loses me there. If I turn my cell off for four days so I can’t be reached, I’m the one being an asshole, by saying “I don’t even CARE if you get your head back on straight.”

First of all, WHY does being an asshole get such a bad wrap?! Assholes are very rarely taken advantage of, and in many cases get what they want. Outside of any moral issues, being an asshole IS a good strategy in many cases.

And the jury is still out on if a ‘quality woman’ would “bail” on a guy running light dread game. I personally can’t say either way, because I’ve never used it. (at least not to my knowledge. I suppose my belief that I *could* replace my wife if necessary might be in and of itself a smidge of dread…) But, that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t work either. Like I said, sometimes women need a reminder that they DO NOT have a monopoly on their men. Their men ALLOW it by choice, and that choice can be revoked. If we were still living in a marriage 1.0 world, I would say that this attitude is completely immoral and wrong. But, since we now have no fault divorce? All bets are off on the “until death do us part” piece of the contract.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

women need a reminder that they DO NOT have a monopoly on their men. Their men ALLOW it by choice, and that choice can be revoked.

If you’re implying that men are doing women a favor by agreeing to monogamy, I don’t buy it. A man who does not desire monogamy should not sign up for it. A relationship is the result of two parties negotiating the best deal they can re wants and needs. Make the deal and then live it. Or renegotiate it if you must. But no whining.

Underdog

One of the recurring themes here when it comes to Roissy is that people take his words too literally without analyzing the underlying principal. Roissy uses hyperbole to amplify his point. Don’t be fooled by his writing style.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Roissy uses hyperbole to amplify his point. Don’t be fooled by his writing style.

Did I call it or what?

http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

Russ, I see your point, but my perspective is no doubt very different because I’m not in a co-hab situation. I need my magical island of serenity, for a variety of reasons.

A Definite Beta Guy

The deltas then see this behavior critique, internalize it, try to mold themselves in what women say they want and… become pussies in the process.

Boom, Steel on Target, +1000, Etc

I have shown this to a bunch of guys and a few girls now. The view of the guys is unanimous: girl is insane. The NICEST thing said is “She is a brat.”

The (admittedly few) girls think nothing Anne did is wrong, that Stephen is abusive, and that Susan has no idea what she’s talking about. It’s totally the guy’s responsibility to do everything and cater to all emotional whims.

This seems to be default attitude among young women. All men should ignore this, listen to Susan fine, listen to young women, NO.

This also makes it extremely difficult to have the kind of “honest” conversation with a girl that Susan is suggesting. Easier to run dread game, unfortunately.

http://www.rosehope.com Hope

Lokland “What Stephen did is not special or dread instilling. It’s normal.”

Yep. If a girl did this same thing because the guy didn’t want to see her and didn’t call back, and she next’ed him, would it be called dread game? No, it’d be totally normal.

Imagine if person A said “Hello how are you?” Person B responds with blank stare. Normal is person A walking away without saying anything else. Abnormal is overanalyzing what’s going on with B and using game to try to get B to respond, and then going “My silence worked like good dread!” when B responds days later.

Russ in Texas

“Jury still out” is an appeal to data-authority which I can’t provide (and nobody can — this is a sub-flavor of the “one true scotsman” fallacy resulting in people going round and round arguing over whose data is superior)

Let’s set morality aside for a moment and talk about ethics and economy.

Ethics: Being an asshole priveleges onself at the expense of others. It thereby places the other person in the position of zero-sum-game: an enemy. This is entirely counter-productive for a marriage or long-term relationship.

Economy: Beginner’s game theory says “always be the dick, and you win.” That’s BEGINNER’S game theory; hawk/dove longitudinal analysis shows quite clearly that the actual winner is the person who returns what is given. Quid-pro-quo wins, and opening with a non-asshole move provides much greater chances for much greater profit. There’s a REASON that christian morality has conquered so much of the globe, even making inroads into places religiously and civilizationally utterly alien to it: while being a dove gets you slaughtered by a “hawk,” pure “hawks” are less efficient over time than people who return dove with dove and hawk with hawk, making the ADMONITION to “open with dove” far more profitable over time.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Ethics: Being an asshole priveleges onself at the expense of others. It thereby places the other person in the position of zero-sum-game: an enemy. This is entirely counter-productive for a marriage or long-term relationship.

All I want for Christmas is more Russ in Texas.

Russ in Texas

Rollo,

With all respect, I don’t think you’ve read the women posting in this thread very well. I haven’t seen what you’ve described here.

Escoffier

“Ignoring a badly-behaving woman is easily categorized as ’emotional abuse.'”

Really? Because I am from a totally hippy dippy soft-head lib enviornment and I have never, ever heard this.

Anyway, many years ago in grad school I developed a crush on this older, very beautiful woman. It took some time for me to get the courage to ask her out but I did it (really awful experience, BTW) and I was turned down; she had a BF.

I basically disengaged after that. I would be polite but not seek her company and avoided small gatherings where I knew she would be or else focused on other people as long as I was there.

About 6-7 months later, while cooking dinner, she knocked at my door. Total surprise. A summer break had intervened during which I had not seen her even once. We were a couple within a week or two.

Never occured to me that I was running “dread game” or anything else. I thought, and still think, that I was simply doing the rational thing.

Russ in Texas

Ironic Misread, sorry — comment to Betaguy, not Rollo.

Ted D

Rollo – “What Suz wants is a Game-aware beta who only (unconsciously, not deliberately) uses Game to fulfill the desires of, and fills the sexual pluralism of women she thinks should naturally adore betas”

Problem is, anyone that succeeds doing things “unconsciously” is either lucky and/or stupid. The ideal would be for men of good moral standing to use game to fulfill THEIR desires, which would in turn fulfill the desire of whatever woman he decided to be with. To me it is the “moral standing” part that separates the users from the winners in Susan’s eyes, and I can’t fault that. In a more ethical society, I’d agree with her on it. But, since we don’t live in a moral and ethical society, I can hardly fault men for taking advantage of whatever they can. It isn’t something *I* would advise, and certainly not how I’d want my boys to behave, but it isn’t my call to make for all men. Best I can do is make sure my kids know the scoop so they can act accordingly.

So the “build a better beta” plan won’t work until we return to a society that actually values morality, at least in a general sense. The environment is simply not suitable for it.

BroHamlet

@Lokland

“What Stephen did is not special or dread instilling. Its normal.”

Absolutely. In fact, we learned a whole lot more about her, and what happens when someone who plays games (whether by necessity or just a bit of caprice in this case) runs into someone who is immune to them. To me it’s a great example of ego vs actual confidence. This would never have been an issue if she’d been acting from the latter, because those who have it don’t have the need to make other people follow their own internal script. She’ll be better for this.

Ted D

ADBG – “This also makes it extremely difficult to have the kind of “honest” conversation with a girl that Susan is suggesting. Easier to run dread game, unfortunately.”

This.

Russ in Texas – “Ethics: Being an asshole priveleges onself at the expense of others. It thereby places the other person in the position of zero-sum-game: an enemy. This is entirely counter-productive for a marriage or long-term relationship.”

Agreed. But I’d like to point out that in general, most people act “at the expense of others” on a daily basis. Now in terms of marriage/LTRs? Yeah, it sets a bad precedent of combativeness in the relationship. Which is why I’d never personally use it as a preemptive strike. However, if my wife started acting in a manner that put ME on the defensive? Like I said, I’d start with an appeal to reason, but I’ve often seen that such attempts fail with women, because appealing to logic isn’t the way they communicate. So, if that failed, perhaps a little dread would induce the emotional response necessary to get her to act and fix the situation. Perhaps it would induce her to act by leaving. Either way, if the situation is bad for me, it will come to a resolution.

“while being a dove gets you slaughtered by a “hawk,” pure “hawks” are less efficient over time than people who return dove with dove and hawk with hawk, making the ADMONITION to “open with dove” far more profitable over time.”

I have no problem with this, and in fact is mostly how I tend to behave. I reflect what is given to me, but I don’t usually fire the first volley. That being said, sometimes my ‘reflection’ is indeed assholean in nature, because it is the correct level of reflection for the issue at hand. I have no problems being that asshole when necessary, but don’t make it a point to be that asshole 24/7

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

What Suz wants is a Game-aware beta who only (unconsciously, not deliberately) uses Game to fulfill the desires of, and fills the sexual pluralism of women she thinks should naturally adore betas. She wants a sanitized, effortless and selfless version of Game that serves the feminine imperative.

Time for Suz to snoooooozzzzz….

Ted D

Susan – “If you’re implying that men are doing women a favor by agreeing to monogamy, I don’t buy it.”

Not at all. I’m saying that a man will agree to monogamy when it presents him with enough benefit to “give up” his other options. And, if those benefits should ever disappear, there is nothing keeping him with her. That’s it, no agenda to paint men as “saints” for giving up sexual variety. It is his choice to make based on a risk/benefit assessment. Thing is, men and woman are now free to reassess anytime they damn well please, regardless of marital status.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Ted

Thanks for clarifying. You are right about the ease of dissolving marriage, but I’m still a fan for a lot of reasons.

BroHamlet

@Hope

“Yep. If a girl did this same thing because the guy didn’t want to see her and didn’t call back, and she next’ed him, would it be called dread game? No, it’d be totally normal.”

I see what you’re getting at, but you can’t “next” someone who has already moved on. People who aren’t operating on ego don’t need to “win” every time. Anna obviously needed to win. Most people are like this. Attractive girls are often even more like this, but you never see it until they run into someone who they consider to be high value. Looks and the external don’t last, for any of us, though, and you’re going to have to address what’s inside at some point, so you might as well do it early.

Russ in Texas

@Susan:

True, and proven so daily, though I think less relevant here.

I can’t play in the circles Anne’s running even if single, b/c my family suffered a social collapse a few generations back and squandered all the family wealth (for the historically-inclined, we used to own Maryland). But: “social knowledge” in the circles Anne navigates is very high, and very, VERY few members of it are the sorts who will be cowed by the sort of behavior Ted’s advocating.

Otherwise, dead on — unless one is a mental sadist, who wants to try to mold their partner into a quietly seething ball of hate?

deti

Interesting to see my name hauled into a thread I haven’t even commented on, called a loser beta chump by Hollenhund, and a know-nothing and wrong nearly all the time by Susan.

Hollenhund: If I’m wasting my time here, so are you.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@deti

Interesting to see my name hauled into a thread I haven’t even commented on, called a loser beta chump by Hollenhund, and a know-nothing and wrong nearly all the time by Susan.

Well, you’re a well known and highly opinionated character in the sphere, you can hardly be surprised just because you haven’t commented.

As for your not being a knowledgeable and reliable source of information pertinent to young women, I’m not saying anything I haven’t said to your face numerous time. I think your views are seriously warped by the places you choose to do your brainwashing learning.

Höllenhund

I know that well, deti.

Russ in Texas

@Ted#438:

Okay, so now that we’ve established a common language, here’s being an asshole:

Round One: You play dove. She returns hawk.
Round Two: She’s still playing hawk, you also return hawk.

Round Three: You turn off your phone. She sees you returning hawk and goes, “wait, hold on,” realizes she’s done the girl equivalent of stepping on her dick, gets her head straight, and throws dove.

But you don’t know that, b/c your phone is off. And you’re still blaming her for playing a card she’s actually abandoned.

“returning hawk” to a hawk play isn’t being an asshole. Pre-emptively playing hawk, or putting yourself into a position where you can’t receive a dove reply, IS. She’s still playing dove, and throws it a few more times until you finally respond, but you’ve now inflicted a wound and reduced the Total Relationship Value in the process.

In terms of actual, non-beginner’s Game Theory — this is a completely avoidabel loss.

See the difference?

Damien Vulaume

@Ted
“the easier solution is to simply avoid women that need lots of game, but just how many of those women exist is up for much debate. And, I’ll add that in the younger age brackets, such a woman would indeed be a unicorn.”

Ted, one thing I never quite get in your (and others’ here) logic, is why the girl would want to play games once she’s with you, and why staying with her if that’s the case. A girl who keeps pulling self defense tricks once you have a relationship is because she’s still way too insecure as well as simply NOT ENOUGH INTO YOU, period. My experience taught me that girls always play games, but only when you’re in the courtship phase (but women, never. They’ve grown up), to which I say it’s fair enough, they have to protect themselves with their own tools. It can even be “charming” at times, if you know how to decode those tricks, for seduction IS a game. It can be emotionally exhausting but the result wonderfull if the intent on both sides is noble. And the reward is something else than a pathetic pseudo relationship that started from a sexual angle too early on. Let’s not even talk about those one night stands that drag on for a week.

JP

@Susan:

“A relationship is the result of two parties negotiating the best deal they can re wants and needs. Make the deal and then live it.”

This is certainly an interesting way of looking at it.

It doesn’t really make much sense to me, but hey, that’s life.

I can’t recall ever “negotiating” a “best deal”.

I was either in a relationship or not in a relationship.

deti

It’s also interesting to see my name brought in here because a few weeks ago, I was the model on how a man ought comport oneself here and that others could learn a lot from me by my commenting here.

Today, however, I am “irrelevant” and I “know nothing” about the SMP and I am “so wrong so often” that my advice is useless.

Oh, how one’s fortunes change with the shifting sands….

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@deti

I was the model on how a man ought comport oneself here and that others could learn a lot from me by my commenting here.

Hmmm, I do recall saying the former, but not really the latter…

I appreciate your debating style, which I think is productive and positive. I do not believe that my readers can learn a lot from you, to be honest, and I said as much in highlighting your own comments on the matter at Alpha Game.

I think you are well qualified to speak on your personal experience. I do not find you credible in the areas of female nature and sexuality or the behavioral norms of college students. I also believe, and have often stated, that you appear to have derived a set of beliefs that sits on sand – e.g. alpha widow, carousel “watchers,” inability of women to bond with husband if not a virgin, and inability of women to find betas attractive.

None of this is new or surprising. I don’t really understand your taking offense.

Damien Vulaume

“I can’t recall ever “negotiating” a “best deal”.
I was either in a relationship or not in a relationship.”

This is what I was going to say. You bargain only once you’re in a long term relationship and things get dangerously into a monotonous habit or an increasingly confrontational one. You never bargain at the begining, unless you both are cold pragmatical partners viewing relationships as something which is discussed like the way you discuss the price of a carpet with the vendor in an Istambul bazaar.. Well, quite a few people are like that.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

You never bargain at the begining, unless you both are cold pragmatical partners viewing relationships as something which is discussed

I did not mean this literally. I mean that from a behavioral economics POV, we all strike deals when we enter relationships, in that we have done some sort of cost/benefit analysis and deemed the idea a good one. Every time you choose one woman over another you are doing this. Every time you agree to monogamy you are weighing the pros and cons.

Lokland

@BroHam

“Absolutely. In fact, we learned a whole lot more about her, and what happens when someone who plays games (whether by necessity or just a bit of caprice in this case) runs into someone who is immune to them.”

+1

I’m specifically not offering advice to Anne because I feel that doing so would be harmful for Stephen.

The Facebook deletion was too childish for someone who wants a relationship.

This is one of those rare instances where I feel that Susan is helping the predator.

A Definite Beta Guy

@ Russ

Ironic Misread, sorry — comment to Betaguy, not Rollo.

Not so ironic. In Real Life, there are a few girls (and guys) that would think me closer to Rollo than Cooper.

That sort of brings me back to my point. I didn’t survey people here at HUS, which I consider one of the few Sane places in the world. I asked girls who have no idea what Red Pill or Susan Walsh even are.

Ted D

DV – “Ted, one thing I never quite get in your (and others’ here) logic, is why the girl would want to play games once she’s with you, and why staying with her if that’s the case. A girl who keeps pulling self defense tricks once you have a relationship is because she’s still way too insecure as well as simply NOT ENOUGH INTO YOU, period.”

I agree. But, if you find yourself married to a woman that is “not enough into you” (as I and many other men have), your choices are: divorce or game. Had I known about game before my divorce, I would have given it my best shot, because *I* took my vows seriously. My ex? Not so much I suppose, since instead of trying to work things out decided she needed to “find herself”. Some people never give up “playing games”, and although we can agree that it is rather immature, it doesn’t change the fact. In many cases, a guy can turn around a “not enough into you” situation with a woman IF he wants to and IF he knows how, which is where game comes into marriage. (and where Athol makes a decent living I might add…)

”You never bargain at the begining, unless you both are cold pragmatical partners viewing relationships as something which is discussed like the way you discuss the price of a carpet with the vendor in an Istambul bazaar.. Well, quite a few people are like that.”

Your last sentence pretty much sums it up to me. Many, many people ARE indeed like that. Many look at relationships from the “what’s in it for me” attitude, and those folks are almost always looking for the best “deal” they can get.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

those folks are almost always looking for the best “deal” they can get.

The only good deals are the ones where both parties are pleased with the outcome.

JP

@Susan:

” I mean that from a behavioral economics POV, we all strike deals when we enter relationships, in that we have done some sort of cost/benefit analysis and deemed the idea a good one.”

Uh, yeah. Do I have a romantic interest in her and does she have a romantic interest in me? I had one failed LTR attempt where at least I was willing to give it a go after talking myself into it over a period of time and one marriage. That’s about it.

“Every time you choose one woman over another you are doing this.”

There’s only ever been one person who I’ve been interested in dating at any one time, so not really. Generally, this happened about once every 12 months if I was lucky. Normally I was interested in the same person for about 12 to 24 months and usually was unable to connect.

“Every time you agree to monogamy you are weighing the pros and cons.”

It never even occurred to me that non-monogamy was a option. Kind of like “should I go rob a bank”?

Iggles

@ Underdog,

Manipulating others = bad

Acting from integrity = good

It’s not that hard, dude.

JP

@ Susan:

“The only good deals are the ones where both parties are pleased with the outcome.”

I’m going to use TedD as an example since he seems to be the one who’s been solidly hit by this. (I’m the one who generally does the firing in my relationships).

His “outcome” got steadily worse every year. It was best at the beginning and then slid into the abyss.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

His “outcome” got steadily worse every year. It was best at the beginning and then slid into the abyss.

True. It sounds like she didn’t keep up her end of the bargain. Ted has said he made some mistakes too. We all do. Unexpected things happen. We keep reevaluating, making choices every day. Staying is a choice. Inertia is a choice.

Damien Vulaume

@Ted
“But, if you find yourself married to a woman that is “not enough into you”

Sorry, but getting married to a woman that is not into you in the first place is way beyond me. You normally always sense those things, or I guess you were way to young and inexperienced when that happened, or is it something else? Social pressure, or because it’s a thing to do after college?

JP

I thought that TedD started out fine and then she disintoed him over time.

I like that word.

Dis-into-ed.

Ted, am I mistaken? I’m not really an expert on Tedding.

Jesse

Ian (154):

I have to say the ‘estrogen poisoned’ woman sounds pretty attractive. I’m imagining her periodical insanity to be roughly equivalent to ‘passionate’ or ‘highly emotional.’ Certainly nothing that is mean, manipulative, vindictive or backstabbing.

Reminds me of the quote attributed to Marilyn Monroe, which I initially thought of as ‘whoa, crazy bitch’ but eventually warmed to, thinking along the lines of ‘well, I’d put up with a bit of that for a really special girl.’

HanSolo (307):

I really don’t understand this need to rate women numerically. It doesn’t mean anything to anyone other than the rater. Does it serve to gratify losers, for lack of a better word, who use it to belittle or reduce women to a number?

It’s no more accurate a system than the words ‘ugly’, ‘decent looking’, ‘pretty’, and ‘oh my God I have to get to know this woman right now.’ At least the latter doesn’t pretend to be objective.

For myself, I only need three categories. There are women I’m not interested in having sex with, women I would have sex with, and women I would swear off other women for. (Okay, that last category is sort of made up, because I don’t really see women who make me want to become monogamous.)

DV – “Sorry, but getting married to a woman that is not into you in the first place is way beyond me. You normally always sense those things, or I guess you were way to young and inexperienced when that happened, or is it something else? Social pressure, or because it’s a thing to do after college?”

In my case, all of the above? She was “into” me in the beginning, but not nearly enough. There were plenty of red flags, but I was never told what they were, and how to look for them. I was 26, she was 21, so lack of experience played a part for sure. The ‘social pressure’ came from my family, that were increasingly telling me it was ‘time to settle down’ and all that. I failed on several fronts spectacularly. 😛

But, head over the MMSL sometime and you’ll see I am in NO WAY alone in finding myself married to a woman that is NOT “into” her husband. In my case, after I got married I took the “time to settle down” speech a bit too seriously, and started dropping outside interests to put my time into my family. I continued to knuckle under to my ex-wife’s desires because I was led to believe that was what I was supposed to do, and my giving in continued to diminish her desire to be with me to the point that she bailed. Of course it became a downward spiral since we were miserable, we both ate worse, got heavier, became more depressed, etc.

If you really want the gory details, I’ll be happy to provide them, but they aren’t relevant to the discussion. The point is, plenty of men seem to find themselves married to a woman that isn’t attracted to them, and in those situations there aren’t many options for a fix.

Russ in Texas

@betaGuy#453

Depends on the definition of “normal teasing” and where you l ive.
I abandoned the East Coast for flyover country and North Texas (back when it was relatively empty before all the economic refugees from the coasts started moving here), and one of the reasons for doing so was that the women are generally just as beautiful, but far less “indoctrinated.”

Ted D

JP – “Ted, am I mistaken? I’m not really an expert on Tedding.”

LOL nope that is a fair description. Although like I said there were red flags. Just a few months prior to the wedding my ex decided having sex was somehow immoral (although we’d been doing so for months prior) and although I didn’t simply take it on the chin, I did agree to limit our sexual interactions considerably until the wedding day. She and I also had doubts the entire engagement, but we were BOTH told by our families that “its completely normal to get cold feet! You’ll be fine afterwards!” She had some daddy issues that I ignored. (because I figured it was normal for all women to have them believe it or not!)

Not long after we married, I started giving up hobbies to spend more time with her and our kids. The last straw was me giving up my last remaining friends when she told me I was spending too much time gigging and should be an adult and give up on childish stuff like playing in a rock band. (paraphrased, I can’t honestly remember exactly what she said.) I quit and with that went the last thing I did outside of work and time with the family, and it was damn near close to the beginning of the end for us. It took another five or so years for that to happen, but it was inevitable from that moment on I think.

Russ in Texas

I’d have said that the hypocrisy surrounding sex was the “moment of inevitable.”

I married a “good girl,” and waiting until married was part of the deal (a painful deal, btw, but well worth it) — that wasn’t something that sprang out of nowhere, but was something she had the integrity to make clear right at the beginning of the “if I date you (exclusively)” discussion.

We’re not 100% traditional, but we ARE both happy, and candor is a huge reason why.

BroHamlet

@Lokland

“The Facebook deletion was too childish for someone who wants a relationship.

This is one of those rare instances where I feel that Susan is helping the predator.”

I have to say I agree to a point. Susan can’t just turn up her nose to her readers, though. Still, a lot of excuses have been made for the way she behaved (she’s “hot” etc.). The subtext I have noticed seems to be that she should have what she wants just because she was born with one major qualification. But, I am with you in that I think the Facebook thing especially, is a huge strike against any type of “keeper” status she might have had. The root of that behavior is not insignificant, and ties in really closely with the question of why (deep down) she wants to get back in his good graces. Just enabling her to leap a hurdle isn’t enough- Susan realizes this no doubt, but she does have a blog to run.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@BroHamlet

Still, a lot of excuses have been made for the way she behaved (she’s “hot” etc.). The subtext I have noticed seems to be that she should have what she wants just because she was born with one major qualification.

I’ll disagree here. I think my language in the OP is very direct and holds her fully responsible for her behavior. I did not state that being beautiful entitles her to treat other people poorly or take them for granted.

I did observe that her mentality is not uncommon among beautiful women, in my experience. I’ve already laid out the reasons why, so I won’t do it again here. I don’t view the “beautiful woman mindset” as a positive one or one that should be reinforced in any way. Rather than relying on men “negging” Anne to make her question her value, I preferred to give her specific examples of inconsiderate behavior, and suggest the way she might begin to make amends. If Anne returns to that mindset, she’s obviously going to be out of the running fairly quickly.

While I do have a blog to run, I am not obligated to feature any particular letter. In fact, I’ve only recently started posting them after a pretty long break. I ran hers because I found it interesting, somewhat unusual, and felt that the commenters here might be able to help her. I think the results bear that out.

Ted D

Russ in Texas – Like I said, there were plenty of red flags, I was just never taught to look for them. And, in some cases, I was specifically taught to overlook them. I could spend days and write pages on it, but it wouldn’t change a thing.

The bottom line: she was originally attracted to who I was when I met her, but through my beliefs in “responsibility” to my family and lots of bad advice, I changed from that man to a pussy whipped yes man, that got massively out of shape and overweight. I can look back and completely understand why she lost attraction for me, but at the time I was completely baffled because I believed I was doing all the right things for her and my family. Turns out, I needed to do more for myself first, like get a backbone. My primary fault was believing that my ex was somehow above taking advantage of me because she was a “good” person. I don’t believe for one moment she intentionally did so, but I offered it to her on a silver platter, and she took it and ran with it.

FWIW I still think she is a “good” person, and we get along rather well now that we are not tied by matrimony. Which works for me since we have children together. She still has lots of personal issues to work out, and she may go to her grave with them at this rate. But thankfully, that is no longer my problem. 😉

Marc

@94 Well explained Susan.
.
There is a control imbalance for Annes equal. For a woman to be a desireable 9, she must be young and pretty. Hot Mess´s are everywhere. (Ever been to L.A.?). For a man to be a 9, he must be so much more, making her equal much rarer. He must be funny, smart, wealthy, tall, confident etc. The problem is, a female 9 is used to having choices and control. When she meets her “equal”, he is in much more demand than her, and her program gets spun out of control. Her hot chick games dont work anymore and shes rattled.
.
High value dudes will give much less effort and you must bite quickly, or the path of less resistance is taken. (your competition).You will never see a circle of high value dudes competing for woman at a cocktail party like you see the average guys doing. They remove themselves from that whirpool of competition as it is seen as being beneath them.
.
I know most will disagree, but I advise Anne to NOT swallow her pride and just move on. Ive ended countless relationships for pride reasons and never regretted any of them. Without your pride and dignity, you have nothing.
.
BTW, we havent seen this Anne, and we are calling her a 9. Is this a “London 9″? Because that would be an “L.A. 6″ or a “Colombian 5″. For the record, an “L.A. 9″ would be a “London 13″.

Damien Vulaume

@Ted:
“She was “into” me in the beginning, but not nearly enough. There were plenty of red flags, but I was never told what they were, and how to look for them. I was 26, she was 21, so lack of experience played a part for sure. The ‘social pressure’ came from my family, that were increasingly telling me it was ‘time to settle down’ and all that. I failed on several fronts spectacularly”

I sympathize with that, and to which I say, The faults are neither yours nor your first wife, but that stupid doctrinal social and family pressure. The only thing I don’t understand is why this dramatic life experience with ONE particular woman under tight family peer pressure has made you view women on the whole in such a negative light? I also don’t understand why you would still rant about it since, by your own admission, you’ve found a descent wife with whom you seem content enough to live with.

Tasmin

“I’ve been dating him for around two months now. ”

I know I’m old and don’t “get” the whole facebook-dating culture, but her story sounds more like hooking-up with a few nice dinners thrown in as opposed to actual grown-up “dating”. It reads like a no-strings deal that she *may want to* turn into more, when she is ready and when he has earned the right to more by assuaging her emotional baggage to the point where she decides the ‘relationship’ is worthy of her emotional investment.

Thing like texting for late night cocktails, “…that drink would probably lead to him coming back with me.” and yet getting bent when the puppet strings go lax should be clear examples of how sex w/o commitment, exclusivity or even just mature communication can make for a difficult path to such. There are obviously expectations, and expectations w/o communication = trouble. And she apparently sees sex as some kind of carrot here, which is problematic for many reasons.

Hot or not, PUA guy or not, she doesn’t sound ready for a grown-up relationship. The situation is basically been casual sex with her establishing the rules of engagement unilaterally and then holding him to what she “thinks” should happen.

“I think until the point of exclusive, the initiatives should be theirs.”

I know the horse has left the barn in this case, but I don’t think I saw any references to the benefits of establishing commitment and exclusivity prior to giving it up. A lot of the least-interest posturing and frankly juvenile passive-aggressive communication and score-keeping could have been headed off with a bit more work on the front end. That is, if she was in fact ready, which I think is in question.

A minimal or withholding emotional posture coupled with non-exclusive sex kind of sounds like something other than “dating” to me. She is basically trying to rely on sexual intimacy to inspire him to move the relationship along according to her terms, without acknowledging that she was lowering the price/value of that sex by withholding her emotional investment. Then she wonders why he wouldn’t take that carrot.

They have yet to establish the mutual respect and level of communication to support anything beyond the casual sex relationship that it seems to be. We can speculate about what this guy is all about, but based on how Anne has approached this situation, to me this has less to do with her being “hot” or a “9” and more to do with very poor sequencing of investments and lacking of alignment and communication of expectations.

I’m just not convinced she actually wants a full-fledged relationship. The issue of her being hot has little to do with how this situation played out and much more to do with how she will be able to find plenty of men willing to engage her in this kind of “dating” – much more so than “average” women can. Given that, and her willingness to engage in sex first, figure it out later will put this statement: “I can’t figure why, I’m not known as promiscuous,” into serious jeopardy.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Tasmin

She is basically trying to rely on sexual intimacy to inspire him to move the relationship along according to her terms, without acknowledging that she was lowering the price/value of that sex by withholding her emotional investment

This is exactly right. I also share your read of the “not yet relationship.” Unfortunately, this pattern of progression is extremely common among young people today. PLI is the default position, and you can see that Anne is loath to give up hand – it makes her feel very vulnerable.

She is very young, and still in school. Yes, she said she sees him as a potential husband and father, but everyone matures later today than they did 50 years ago. This is a good example of why marrying at 20 or while in college is generally a very poor idea.

Ted D

DV – “The only thing I don’t understand is why this dramatic life experience with ONE particular woman under tight family peer pressure has made you view women on the whole in such a negative light?”

Well to be frank, I don’t see it as a “negative light” at all. I see it as a more realistic view in general. I still treat my wife as an individual, which means that I treat her the way she treats me. But, overall, I simply have a negative outlook of humanity, not just women. I simply don’t rant about bad male behavior here because it isn’t the primary conversation. If you look though, you’d see that I am just as judgmental of “trash dicks” as I am of “sluts”. I’m tend to be equally unfair to everyone. 😉

“I also don’t understand why you would still rant about it since, by your own admission, you’ve found a descent wife with whom you seem content enough to live with.”

There are many reasons, but the primary two are:
1. to be an example of what NOT to do for young guys
2. Because I have four children that will be wading into the SMP soon.

Actually, my oldest is 18 and is starting college in the spring. Luckily she is currently in the beginning stages of a relationship with a decent guy a few years older than she is. He could use a little nudge in the alpha direction, but so far my daughter hasn’t shown to be the type that needs a lot of gaming.

Also, I tend to believe that our current social climate completely sucks, and it is a never ending source of irritation to me that no one really gives a shit. I’d much rather fix everything than have to teach my kids how to cope in a flawed system, but other than ranting there isn’t much I can do to fix that. I’m doing most of what I can, which is trying to instill some decent morality in my children without hindering their ability to succeed in an immoral and unethical society.

And maybe bitching on occasion makes me feel better. It’s kinda how I tend to work things out. I get pissed/depressed, I bitch and moan, when I get tired of bitching and moaning I fix it. Since I can’t fix this, I often return to bitching and moaning. I haven’t managed to get to the point where I just don’t give a shit anymore. I’m hoping it arrives right after our youngest turns 18. I figure at that point, I’ve done my duty to my kids and they can take the baton and run with it. I’ll be looking for somewhere to live in relative peace to enjoy whatever time I’ve got left however I want. At this point all I’m doing is honoring the responsibilities I chose to take on until the only people I am responsible for/to are myself and my wife.

deti

DV: “I also don’t understand why you would still rant about it since, by your own admission, you’ve found a descent wife with whom you seem content enough to live with.”

The need to learn, the need to remember so as not to repeat the previous error, and the hope of internalizing it for one’s children so it can be taught to them and hopefully prevent them from making the same error.

http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

@Sai @Just1Z

@Sai

if you’re going to listen to crazy guys on the web, can I suggest that you stick to Marellus and myself?

It’s no more accurate a system than the words ‘ugly’, ‘decent looking’, ‘pretty’, and ‘oh my God I have to get to know this woman right now.’ At least the latter doesn’t pretend to be objective.

I never said it was more accurate or objective. The advantages are that it gives more granularity than the 4 categories you mentioned and it’s faster to type ‘9’ instead of ‘gorgeous’. Since there are variations between solidly pretty (an 8 to me), gorgeous (9), and 1/100,000 gorgeous (10), and the various degrees of ugly then it is useful to many to talk about it.

Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder and there can be systematic and random differences between what a 1-10 scale would mean to each man (and woman).

Damien Vulaume

@Deti:
“The need to learn, the need to remember so as not to repeat the previous error, and the hope of internalizing it for one’s children so it can be taught to them and hopefully prevent them from making the same error.”

“The need to learn”.
Sure, but you should be past that one by now.

“The need to remember”…
Come on pal, that sounds already like an eternal rancour against the first heartbreak… I’ve had those as well and moved beyond without viewing the fairer sex as the eternal evil opposite.

“so it can be taught to them and hopefully prevent them from making the same error.”
Well, I only hope you don’t give them your view about how women are or how they should be according to you. Nonetheless, I wish you well.

Anne

@ Marc
I am not from London. English girls are unattractive, but there are hardly any English girls in the capital, just like there are hardly any Americans in New York (which is why, to be honest, you find good-looking women there).
It comes down to taste anyway – some men prefer Colombian women, in which case I wouldn’t be their type.

deti

“without viewing the fairer sex as the eternal evil opposite.”

Women aren’t any more evil than men are; but they aren’t any LESS evil either.

HanSolo

@Ted D

I’ll be looking for somewhere to live in relative peace to enjoy whatever time I’ve got left however I want.

Actually, now that I think of it, I haven’t seen IMG or Max with *any* Colombian types recently, at least not ranked ones.

Emily

>> ” Is this a “London 9″? Because that would be an “L.A. 6″ or a “Colombian 5″. For the record, an “L.A. 9″ would be a “London 13″.”

Oh snap!!! I’m no Kate Upton, but I experienced a noticeable increase in SMV the second I got to England. It’s a weird experience to go through, and I suspect that I’d have a really hard time readjusting to my “old” SMV if I were to leave.

Ted D

HanSolo – Montana huh? Maybe. That will largely depend on what the U.S. looks like when I’m ready to move on. At this point, I’m not limiting myself to staying within the States, and if things get any worse, I’ll rule them out entirely. Lots of places in the world where you can live a good life on a savings nest egg, and as much as I’d like to be all pro-America, I don’t have much faith in our government at this point.

http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

@Hansolo #482

Homigod,

Ted D

Susan – “It sounds like she didn’t keep up her end of the bargain.”

I don’t know that she knew exactly what the “bargain” was.

“Ted has said he made some mistakes too.”

I don’t know that *I* knew exactly what the “bargain” was either to be honest. We were both working from an incorrect set of rules/scripts, and neither of us had enough raw experience to know any better.

I sincerely hope she works her issues out, but I don’t know if she has it in her to do the hard work required. Like I said, no longer my problem. 😉

Russ in Texas

@Lokland#452.

Disagree. If Anne is a *successful* model, it wouldn’t be all that hard to figure out who she is (since I follow fashion, if she is up in ranked-model territory, I can actually make a pretty good educated guess). Modelling is like acting; LOTS of people wanting in, relatively few “top talent” at the top, and drama splashing all over FB is the LAST thing you need.

That can be career damage, and it is ENTIRELY appreciable that the account would get the axe instantly under those circumstances.

HanSolo

@Marellus

Behind that mountain is Iceberg Lake due to the shade of the mountain and here’s a pic I took of the reflection of the sun, clouds, sky and mountain amidst the mini-icebergs in the lake:

Ted, what HanSolo hasn’t told you is that winters in that section are BRUTAL, much, MUCH worse than you’d normally espect at that latitude.

I used to live nearby; don’t get me wrong, it’s gorgeous, but it’s not like just slipping off to East Tennessee.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

I’m not prepared to jump into a discussion of regional female SMVs, but I can tell you that my claim that Anne is a 9 is based on my own judgment, confirmed by three young males who had no idea who she is. One asked, “Is that Kate Upton?” As I said, Anne looks a bit like the bottom, *good* pic of KU I posted earlier. I guess you could say she’s a Boston 9, whatever that is.

The only reason her looks are relevant is that I think it explains her unwillingness to meet Stephen halfway, and her assumption that she could win him with little effort and no emotional investment. No doubt it’s worked for her before. However, she really likes this one, he didn’t tolerate her nonsense, so she needs to adjust her mindset.

HanSolo

@Russ in Texas

Just stay for the summer. 😉 Then off to Brazil and catch summer there.

Actually, it’s beautiful in winter too with the mountains covered in snow and sitting by a warm fireplace watching football.

Escoffier

“just like there are hardly any Americans in New York”

This is not true.

SayWhaat

@ Emily:

You know what, I felt an increase in SMV when I was in London too! Among Indian guys at least. Guys bought me drinks, came up to tell me I was “really fit”, hitting on me in pairs — I even noticed one guy turning his head to look at me twice, lol. (It was weird because he was walking in *front* of me.)

That being said, I also keenly felt a drop in status. Indians in the UK/Europe generally have a lower socio-economic status than they do in the US (rigorous US immigration standards –> different class of people). I heard some racist stuff. Given the choice between Europe and the US, I’d probably still choose the US.

Anne

@ Escoffier,
I don’t know the stats, but every time you meet an good-looking girl in NY, she will be from another country. Bigger city – more international, less Americans, less obesity. It’s the same with London.

Russ in Texas

Don’t get me wrong, Han. It’s one of the very few and specific parts of the US which would lure me out of the subtle beauty of my lovely, flat, drab, ugly-as-death scrub plains, should I stumble onto the right offer/opportunity (and you guys have got the scrub plains, too).

I’ve got GREAT memories from that part of the country. But it’s not for everyone.

Russ in Texas

@Susan#498,

If Anne *is* who I would guess she is (and it’s none of my damned business), then I concur, she would be outside of my usual preferences but an unarguable high-9.

@Anne#499,

Yes. Obesity is a HUGE issue in the US. It is elsewhere, too, but we seem to have fallen off the edge of the map into “here be elephants” country.

http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

@Hansolo

There is nothing like this where I live. Nothing. The only place that might have vistas like this, is Lesotho … and there they still practice lobola

Anyway, I can understand why Sam Neil’s character in The Hunt for Red October said he’d love to see Montana.

Escoffier

“but every time you meet an good-looking girl in NY, she will be from another country”

This is not true either, not even as an exaggeration.

NYC is a giant vacuum cleaner hoovering up pretty girls from all over the nation. I don’t doubt that there are plenty of pretty foreigners too but the idea that all the good looking girls here are from overseas is preposterous.

Emily

SayWhaat,

I’m sure that that your American boyfriend makes you a bit biased, in the same way that my adorable English boyfriend makes me a bit biased. 😉 I’m very much on TEAM ENGLISH GUYS. 😛

http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

Suzan, will you kindly unmoderate my latest comment ? Thank You.

Anne

It’s impossible to agree completely on ‘attractiveness’. I understand that male readers, annoyed by my initial email and perhaps bitter from bad experience with an “entitled woman”, will do what they can to convince me I am not “as hot as I think I am”. I have never said anything about my appearance, and I cannot be everyone’s type. All I know is that I am Stephen’s “type”.
I have observed different levels of female beauty in many larger cities, but the amount of attention I get from men in any European capital or NY or LA, does not vary that much.

@Russ in Texas
I am pretty certain I am not who “you think I am”, because there is really little way of knowing.

http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

Russ in Texas wrote:

Ted, what HanSolo hasn’t told you is that winters in that section are BRUTAL, much, MUCH worse than you’d normally espect at that latitude.

Skiing dry powder is an awesome, spiritual experience mkay?

Damien Vulaume

@Anne:
By the way, how’s Stephen doing? Planning on texting him later, say around 5?

Russ in Texas

Anne, you’re almost certainly correct, and it’s is definitely not important. I *do* hope you and Stephen do well — that’s the only actual important thing we’ve discussed in 400-some posts!!

Russ in Texas

Mr. Nervous Toes:

Sure. Try building a snowman or having a decent snowball fight with the stuff. :p

http://www.rosehope.com Hope

Here in Salt Lake we have nice mountains, but I’m not much of an outdoors type. It is a gorgeous view, though.

Emily, no wonder I sometimes see you posting when I’m up at 5am. You’re in England. Way cool!

SayWhaat

Emily,

I’m sure that that your American boyfriend makes you a bit biased, in the same way that my adorable English boyfriend makes me a bit biased. I’m very much on TEAM ENGLISH GUYS.

LOL, I didn’t know your bf was English! That accent must be a major plus. I love accents. BF and I know a couple where the girl is Irish and the guy is from Uganda. I could sit in the same room and listen to them talk all day…

Joe

@Marellus,
It would really help your cause if you spelled Susan’s name correctly.

Emily

When I first arrived, I pretty much had a crush on every guy I talked to. But I’ve been over here for two years now, so I’ve actually developed an immunity to most of the accents. That being said, you have NO IDEA how much I’m looking forward to bringing my British boyfriend back home and showing him off!

Russ in Texas

Emily,

My wife’s Hungarian accent still occasionally turns some heads, though she’s “going native” now, and is on the phone with people in Memphis regularly — so sometimes she turns my head by combining something very Buda with a twang that would throw a basketball.

Just1Z

@Marellus
I’m afraid that my dutch is even worse than my german, and I haven’t heard much afrikaans. Had a few dive buddies around SEA from down your way though. Them Aussies, Kiwis and Scandies are endemic out that way – good times weere had!

spent some time on HRMS Blommendal (Dutch Royal Navy) a few decades ago. unfortunately the phonetic alphabet stuck better than the local lingo.

Most shit testing is not intended to deceive at all, the intent is to qualify the male. In fact, most of it is not even conscious. Nothing Machiavellian about it.

Just1Z

@Emily
can you tell brummie from liverpudlian? devonian from geordie?

it’s generally to the English guys’ great good fortune that most Americans don’t know a good accent from a bad one (anecdotally speaking, of course). You may well be getting wise to that…damn

me? I’ve got a non-estuarial generic south-east English one, but one can pile on the plum if required.

I once had a woman from Savannah ask me to keep talking, didn’t matter what I said because she loved my accent so much…cool! except that in, oh so many ways, it was a shame that she was four decades my senior at the time…FML

Just1Z

@Marellus, that’s a nice thought…

Russ in Texas

Just1z:

True story. When Reing of Crap (I mean Rain of Fire, sorry) came out (nice little B movie that could have been very good, spoiled by totally inappropriate soundtrack), a lot of my friends here in Texas LITERALLY couldn’t understand the actors’ dialogue — the Geordie was completely impenetrable to them. My wife having lived there and me having friends from not far off, we didn’t have that problem, and the two of us had to translate for the resto f the room.

Emily

@ Just1Z,

I honestly don’t understand why there isn’t a mass exodus of British guys into North America! I keep telling guys this, and they laugh, but I mean it! You know the part in Love Actually where the two British guys go to America? That’s actually how it works.

I still have a lot to learn when it comes to the regional accents. I can tell if an accent is a Northern accent or if it’s really posh or if it’s a stereotypical Essex accent, but most of the subtleties get lost on me. I’m slowly learning, but there are SO MANY accents in such a small area!

http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

@Just1Z @Russ

What about Guy Ritchie movies ?

Just1Z

@Russ
yeah, I don’t think that the reverse problem crops up much as ‘we’ grow up to a lot of US TV shows.

I worked with a glaswegian woman that was usually comprehensible, but every now and again she came into work and…oops. She had talked to family back home the night before and her accent went up and the speed with it – cue ‘pardon’, ‘sorry’, ‘did not quite catch that’, ‘come again’, blank stare. She slowed down and toned it down after an hour or two.

Now there are lovely Sco’ish accents, but glaswegian is not one of them.

a book that is only really readable to me if I mouth the words on the page (and it is a great book, very funny) is
The Long Midnight Of Barney Thomson: A Serial Killer Thriller (Barney Thomson #1) by Douglas Lindsayhttp://www.amazon.co.uk/Long-Midnight-Barney-Thomson-ebook/dp/B0060CIX6U
he talks a lo’ a mince. d’ya ken? maybe no’ for the hens.
(Lindsay toned the accent down a lot for the rest of the series)

one’s about serial killing, the other about drugs. Barney’s is the funnier story.

Underdog

@OffTheCuff

Actually, a woman shittesting a man is the equivalent of the man checking out her body.

“Deception” on a woman’s part would be wearing makeup, high heels, push up bras, hair extensions, tanning, shaving her legs, plucking her eyebrows, etc. — to unnaturally make herself more physically attractive and manipulate the man’s perception of her.

Everybody’s cool with that. But as soon as a guy uses dread to unnaturally demonstrate his status and raise her attraction — it’s labeled as insecurity and manipulation.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Underdog

Not sure why I’m bothering, but:

“Deception” on a woman’s part would be wearing makeup, high heels, push up bras, hair extensions, tanning, shaving her legs, plucking her eyebrows, etc. — to unnaturally make herself more physically attractive and manipulate the man’s perception of her.

Everybody’s cool with that. But as soon as a guy uses dread to unnaturally demonstrate his status and raise her attraction — it’s labeled as insecurity and manipulation.

The equivalent of a woman’s heightening her physical attractiveness is a man’s heightening his physical attractiveness. In fact, studies of Dark Triad males show that they’re not better looking naturally, they just put a huge effort into their personal appearance. Hairstyling, facial hair, clothing to show off musculature, tanning, etc. Also heel lifts, boots with a heel for added height, as well as clothing that sends a certain message, e.g. black leather jacket = bad boy rebel. Men are no less likely to deceive re their appearance or anything else. It is well known that when dating online, men regularly exaggerate both height and income in their profiles.

The equivalent of a man’s using dread is a woman’s using dread. Waiting to return text messages, not picking up the phone, giving vague answers about plans, flaking, flirting with other men in front of your partner, wistfully mentioning exes, inside jokes with the gf’s he is not privy to, etc.

BroHamlet

@Susan

“I’ll disagree here. I think my language in the OP is very direct and holds her fully responsible for her behavior. I did not state that being beautiful entitles her to treat other people poorly or take them for granted.”

I think your advice was on the money. I was responding to some of your comments earlier in the comment thread where you seemed to be making a big deal about SMV- I wasn’t clear about that. Someone else has pointed out that at the upper end of the spectrum, there’s a big difference between what constitutes hot between a woman and a man, which makes for an imbalance in the numbers and serves to make looks a lot less important at that level. That’s not to kick dirt at all. But it does make the identity piece I have been harping on really important for hot girls who date in their range (which is nearly all of them), since it’s easy to get caught up in the external reinforcement that people are always providing. Personally I’d say you’d be doing a big service by writing something like an inner game primer for women- something less specific and more abstract to balance with the strategy. Anyhow, food for thought. Merry Christmas

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@BroHamlet

Personally I’d say you’d be doing a big service by writing something like an inner game primer for women- something less specific and more abstract to balance with the strategy. Anyhow, food for thought. Merry Christmas

This is a great idea. If you or anyone else has suggestions, shoot them to me. This is one I’ll have to think about a bit. Merry Christmas to you too!

http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

Re : Shit tests

Her : Do you do sports ?

Me : No, I’m lazy.

She cracked up. She couldn’t leave me alone. She was only ten years old.

Unbelievable.

Just1Z

@Marellus
I do like Guy’s films. Brad Pitt as cool in Snatch, though he clearly couldn’t speaka-da-pikey. They really pulled that off very well.

The ‘Zombies vs Cockneys’ film that I mentioned recently was funny but probably a little troublesome – kna wot I mene, mate? I gave a short list of translations for cockney rhyming slang to ‘normal’ on HUS (somewhere). It’s very Guy Ritchie-esque.

I’ll have to look Ritchie up. For somebody with a horribly degraded LOVE of appallingly-bad B movies, I’m actually pretty pathetic when it comes to pop culture – no t.v. and hobbies that are either nerdy as hell, or else high-academic-boring.

I’ve heard Glaswegian, though, and wow. I find it quite difficult.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

Sue: “Most shit testing is not intended to deceive at all, the intent is to qualify the male. In fact, most of it is not even conscious. Nothing Machiavellian about it.”

So if I deceive a women with the intent to get laid, it’s ok – so long as I am not conscious of it. Perfect!

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

So if I deceive a women with the intent to get laid, it’s ok – so long as I am not conscious of it. Perfect!

If you were not conscious, you could not be held accountable for a conscious choice, could you? I think a better analogy would be your doing a double take at a beautiful woman before you could stop yourself. Or fantasizing about sex with a beautiful stranger.

It is important to note that shit testing is a response to a woman’s perception of male weakness. If you’re getting shit tested, you’re either going way too soft or you’re dating a ball buster who requires massive shows of dominance.

Damien Vulaume

@Susan:
“In fact, most of it is not even conscious. Nothing Machiavellian about it.Most shit testing is not intended to deceive at all, the intent is to qualify the male.”

Yes, I strongly believe that most of it is not even conscious. Definitely not something machiavelian, but rather a self protective manner of quantifying man’s value, yet at times definitely subconsciously Machiavelic…

http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

@Russ

Ever saw Blood Diamonds where Leo Di Caprio plays a Saffa ? His impersonation of the Saffa-accent is good. I’ve read that the Saffa-accent is one of the most difficult accents for an actor can imitate.

Steve: There are three things all men should know, and it’s time you did too. You’re never going to be famous, you’re fatter than you think, and, most important of all, they don’t keep wearing stockings

Russ in Texas

On par with Chaucer is fine, since I happen to be a medievalist. On par with Beowulf, and I’m calling it a day.

Just1Z

@Russ
to (mis?)quote a great American philosopher, “A man must know his limitations”

me? my limit is Glaswegian, and ahm no talkin’ mince here

Underdog

@Susan

“The equivalent of a woman’s heightening her physical attractiveness is a man’s heightening his physical attractiveness”

That’s not how it works. Men are attracted to physical appearance that signal fertility in women. Women are attracted to behaviors that signify status/dominance in men. I feel like this is basic red pill stuff here and you’re reverting to equalist/feminist thinking.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Women are attracted to behaviors that signify status/dominance in men.

Women are attracted to men who signal “good genes.” Looks are very important to women. They look for symmetry, strength, and signs of a strong immune system. If you don’t accept that, you’re kidding yourself.

A Definite Beta Guy

Waiting to return text messages, not picking up the phone, giving vague answers about plans, flaking, flirting with other men in front of your partner, wistfully mentioning exes, inside jokes with the gf’s he is not privy to, etc.

Sometimes this is not necessarily bad.

Well some of it.

If she sends me a text message every 15 minutes, that’s kind of a problem.

This factors into guys not texting/calling/etc all the time, too. Us Blue-Pill Beta Guys REALLY have to hold ourselves back when we want to express more, which is what is actually necessary to keep attraction, but the way “dread game” is being described in this thread, well, all Blue Pill Beta Guys are Grade-A Dicks.

Just1Z

@Russ
speaking of unusual music (which we weren’t) and adding in Hungarian (your wife), have you heard any ‘Ladytron’ (kind of ‘Roxy Music’ish). One of the two lead singers is a rather good looking Hungarian lady. I wouldn’t say that it’s a favourite of mine, but it’s catchy when you’re in the mood. Might surprise your wife too…

Because why would someone who is secure and confident BOTHER playing a game like deliberately turning your phone off for 4 days so you’re GF can’t contact you?

Ted beat me to it. Because it works. That’s what people here and elsewhere still don’t understand about Game. The tactics WORK. It is only the reasons as to why they work that are in question. Expressing doubt about the tactics only indicates that you genuinely have no idea what you’re talking about. Being secure and confident doesn’t indicate behaving in a sub-optimal manner that reduces your chances of getting what you want.

It’s not your hitting on other women that creates dread (though I’m sure she wouldn’t appreciate it), it’s other women coming after you. That’s the main reason I think this tactic is low value. A woman whose husband has options, or who women find attractive in general, is well aware of it. Acting creepy and inappropriate with other people’s wives just humiliates your wife, it doesn’t make her want to give you a blow job.

And that is irrelevant if it makes her give you the blow job whether she thinks she wants to or not. Susan, the main reason you think this tactic is low value is because you were scarred by it as a child. But just because you see your father as low value and you saw him use the tactic does not mean that the tactic itself is of low value, much less the men who utilize it.

Genuine indifference may be more honest than the synthetic Game imitation, but it’s not necessarily less damaging to the woman involved. Do you really think it makes a woman happier or helps her self-esteem to know that the man in her life genuinely doesn’t care that much about whether she is in his life or not, as opposed to having him fake it every now and again?

I agree that it would be best if everyone was open, honest, and disdained tactics of manipulation and control. But that’s simply not the case for most of the people most of the time. Here is a question for you: do you agree that once a woman shows she is willing to utilize manipulative and controlling tactics, or play fast and loose with the truth, a man is perfectly justified in doing the same in return?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@VD

And that is irrelevant if it makes her give you the blow job whether she thinks she wants to or not.

If she gives you a blow job that she’s not sure she wants to give you, the attraction is already eroding. Sex with resentment is a malignant thing. There is no possibility for a good marriage when dread is in play.

Susan, the main reason you think this tactic is low value is because you were scarred by it as a child. But just because you see your father as low value and you saw him use the tactic does not mean that the tactic itself is of low value, much less the men who utilize it.

This is a misinterpretation of what I have shared here. I am actually very close to my father and see him as high value. I believe he was desperately unhappy with a bipolar wife, which is understandable. However, he never used the tactic of instilling dread. He is extremely charismatic, even now, and has always received a lot of attention from women. My mother was pissed because he enjoyed it, but the attention was a DHV. His soliciting it would have been a DLV.

Why would a man of high value ever need to instill dread?

Do you really think it makes a woman happier or helps her self-esteem to know that the man in her life genuinely doesn’t care that much about whether she is in his life or not, as opposed to having him fake it every now and again?

Frankly, I cannot imagine living with this Hobson’s choice. How about the man in my life genuinely does care that I am in his life and openly professes that? I share that sense of gratitude and express it frequently myself.

Here is a question for you: do you agree that once a woman shows she is willing to utilize manipulative and controlling tactics, or play fast and loose with the truth, a man is perfectly justified in doing the same in return?

Justified from a moral standpoint? Perhaps. But it’s a loser’s game. A War of the Roses. At that point, you might as well cut your losses and move on.

VD

But just because you see your father as low value and you saw him use the tactic does not mean that the tactic itself is of low value, much less the men who utilize it.

Let me rephrase that, it came out sounding much too harsh. “But just because you saw your father as low value in this regard etc…

derpistan

Others have touched on it already, but this is my synopsis of what happened. This woman has never had someone turn her down before. She’s has her ass kissed her entire life. She blows off this dude at 8pm because she has to “sleep” for 2 hours (which is bullshit if you ask her, she didn’t sleep, just a convenient lie to make her feel better), then calls him at 11p.m for a late night booty call. She didn’t really want to hang out with him, she wanted to tolerate him for a drink or two and then have another fuck buddy session. Her late night booty call is DENIED. The first time in her life this has happened. She hasn’t dealt with people out of college yet who have lives outside of getting laid, and certainly hasn’t dealt with someone who thinks their career is more important than her vajayjay. This denial gets her PISSED OFF (her words), her ego is so fragile about it that she has to come back and tell him she doesn’t want to hang out with him for the near future, in order to save ‘face’ in her eyes. He, of course being a logical dude, says ‘sure call me when you can’, which enrages her further because it’s not supplicating (some people call it respecting yourself, I would say you need game in this era to reject the feminist mindset enough to respect yourself like this). She then decides to shit on him again by calling him at 1 a.m. and waking him up (to remind him that she doesn’t give a shit about his career) to request another booty call. Again, DENIED. In light of these two rejections, she realizes she doesn’t have ‘hand’ (her words), and since she’s so full of herself she can’t have a relationship without that dynamic, she never asks if they are still on for Saturday, because double checking means she doesn’t have ‘hand’, they would be equals. Obviously, after realizing he’s just a booty call and not wanting to be just that (usually these are called NICE guys and not pursued by 9’s but of course $$$ changes things), he blows her off for the Saturday party he’s been bragging to all his friends that he has a hot date for. She then unfriends him on Facebook, the ultimate 16 year old diss. Then, being of sound hamster solipsistic mind, she wonders why after she unfriended him on Facebook, and called him at midnight on a work night twice for a booty call, why he hasn’t come crawling back to her asking why she defriended him and begging for her attentions again.
Sounds like high school to me. This woman is in for a rude awakening when she leaves college.
It’s l

Russ in Texas

@Just1Z#546,

That’s not Hungarian. That’s slavic, which I speak poorly. Big wide vowels, so something southern, probably Croat or Bulgarian (ALL slavic languages are about as close together as french-italian at the outside, but I speak just enough of the common words and phrases to get around town and play tourist or find my way to the archives — anything else and I need help, bigtime).

JuTR

Bastiat, you said, “Every man really needs a Safe Room, if not a Safe House…Batcave, Fortress of Solitude, Tony Stark’s private lab, etc. At a minimum, it should be equipped with secure access (I recommend Medeco locks), high-quality porn/sports-viewing equipment, sound system, heavy bag(s), a well-stocked bar area, a microwave, and adequate workshop tables and shelving for hobbies and interests.”

I think I agree with this. Russ didn’t like the locks with his married perspective, but I don’t think many men really disagree with the rest. Introverts need their retreats more than extoverts, I suspect.

Russ in Texas

@VD#547,

This is the part that throws me:

Yes, it works. It ABSOLUTELY works, if executed correctly. But does that mean it’s necessarily the right tool for the job?

If a man’s crossed that oh so special line, I *could* bust his nose and reverse his knee as a way of getting him to see my point. Or, if I’m an actual reasonable human being, I might be able to fix the problem by sitting him down and buying him a beer.

Given the choice, wouldn’t the buy-him-a-beer non-nuclear option be preferred first?

derpistan

Oh so Anne, how did that text message/email/phone message (hopefully you have enough class to supplicate on the phone) go? It’s been a few days now. Inquiring minds want to know. Or let me guess, this is all mental masturbation.

Russ in Texas

@JuTR

This one’s fundamentally a de-gustibus thing. I’m heavily introverted, but so is my wife, and we have a very, very quiet house. To the point that I haul my kid to McDonalds, where I would NEVER actually eat otherwise, just to get her around a bunch of rambunctious crazy people playing on slides.

If my wife were an outgoing social creature with lots of family friends over, a television (which we don’t even own) blaring, and all that, then yes, I would absolutely require a Fortress of Solitude. But outside of the kitchen, which is her territory, it’s my g-d house, and I’m not retreating into a corner in order to do the things I do, unless they involve dangerous chemicals. (withdrawing is what happens to doormats in horror stories who wind up finding themselves living in a garage or basement while the wife runs a house he barely even recognizes).

Russ in Texas

derp — too early. She just contacted the guy yesterday.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

derp — too early. She just contacted the guy yesterday.

He said that he wants very much to see her, and gave her his schedule for the next three days. They have made a plan to see one another during that time.

derpistan

“Has it come to that? Not begging = Game?”

Who else is going to teach you to respect yourself? Your dad that is never around? Your mom that hates men from her college study days? The football locker room in high school? It is the posters you don’t like, Rollo and Roissy and Roosh (The Triple R(tm) Respect yourself team) that have taken it upon themselves to remind men to ignore everything they were taught in life, and look back on their life and remember what worked, and realize it was -always- bullshit like playing it cool or ignoring her that gave you access to the best sex from the best looking women. Of course, you try to bury those thoughts, because you lose respect for humans, both male and female, when you realize that everything Edward Bernays said was correct.

Jesse

The worst thing I can say about Anne is that she comes across as lacking some some grace, charm and femininity. She seems a bit… stiff.

Having said that, I’m not comfortable criticizing her very harshly because I don’t know enough about the situation. It seems a bit uncouth to be too definitive.

Also, Russ, I have seen some very attractive Hungarian women, but I am too ashamed to mention specifically which corners of the Internet I have found them in. Ha ha.

“It is the posters you don’t like, Rollo and Roissy and Roosh (The Triple R(tm) Respect yourself team) that have taken it upon themselves to remind men to ignore everything they were taught in life, and look back on their life and remember what worked, and realize it was -always- bullshit like playing it cool or ignoring her that gave you access to the best sex from the best looking women. Of course, you try to bury those thoughts, because you lose respect for humans, both male and female, when you realize that everything Edward Bernays said was correct.”

Game is just a brute force social engineering hack.

Not impressed.

Underdog

@JP

“Game is just a brute force social engineering hack.”

Ted D

JP – “Game is just a brute force social engineering hack”

As a former IT security guy, impressive or not, brute force hacks often work. And as Vin Diesel said in the Fast and the Furious, “it don’t matter if you win by an inch or a mile, winning is winning.”

Maybe if you grew up in a hole with zero social skills and look like a mole-rat light game might not work.

However on the right women being a ‘gentleman’ (not a pussy) is quite effective.

The problem with PUAs is they are unable to ID the different types of women.
And dark women tend to have a lot of pull (slutty hot) vs. the light women most of whom have 0 femininity and 0 pull (least in North America).

——————————

On the FB bit.

Don’t care.
Stated above.
If you can’t tell whether its dark game (temper tantrum FB deletion, insanity game actually) or work related (light game) either do not proceed or treat with dark game.

Personally from how it was written I went forward with the interpretation that this girl was actually nuts.

Under no circumstance would I view being turned down as an acceptable reason for what occurred.

derpistan

“Game is just a brute force social engineering hack.”

I remember back in college I dated an extreme hotty for a few weeks, getting nowhere. We went out to see some music, and I had basically gotten so frustrated with her I decided to be a dick (There was no concept of game in the early 90’s so I can’t call it running game) and scammed on another woman at the table next to me, got her phone number, chatted her for a full hour ignoring the woman I came with, and even said at one point ‘Let me drop of my FRIEND I came with, and we can go find some bar that closes right at 2 after the shows over’. Guess who had hot sex with a hotty that night. Of course the next morning, she went back to ignoring me again, because the GAMING WORE OFF, but it was ok, all my roomates heard the balls slappin’ against her ass, my legend was secured. You can act like a bitch after that but it really doesn’t mean shit to me since we both know you were moaning with my dick inside you last night. That, my friends, is GAME before it was called that. Pull your head out of your ass with these terms and trying to put them in little cubicles for you to shame.
To summarize, -game works-, -game over-.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@derpistan

Of course the next morning, she went back to ignoring me again, because the GAMING WORE OFF

Well there you go. Game is a 12 hour fix. You got balls deep and then kicked to the curb. You could look back on balls slappin’, but you knew it wasn’t real. She didn’t really like you.

Lokland

Note: In all instances where dark game is used. For all you Nice Guys there is the DO NOT ENGAGE option.

That should be obvious.

Russ in Texas

@Lokland#563.

These guys remind me of an old adage that seems appropriate: “when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” Yeah, it’s a tool that can work. But holy SHIT if you’re looking for a quality ltr/marriage with a quality woman, is it the worst of all the workable tools to pick. (And I’m *not* a nice guy. I work really fucking hard at being a nice guy.)

Yeah, I suppose if you just absolutely HAD to screw some hot crazy falling knife, you’d need a hammer. But, uh, for the vast majority of men, there are better women, and better women FOR you….

Russ in Texas

@Sai#558.

One of the “recent classics” that’s been used in a lot of movies is music by Marta Sebastyen.

Russ in Texas

@Derpistan#556.

“Who else is going to teach you to respect yourself? ”

Narcissists don’t need any additional help respecting themselves.
For the rest of us, how about learning to do something HARD, and developing some skills? Or learning to box? Macho bullshit aside, I can take any spineless dweeb off the street and build him up so that after a year, he doesn’t care about getting punched in the face, let alone some non-quality-chick’s temper tantrum or attempt to manipulate.

Lokland

@Russ

+1 to your entire comment at 563

With the added tid bit that sometimes screwing a “hot crazy falling knife” is a welcome respite from the drudgery that is normality.

Just don’t marry her.

Lokland

BTW, I like the hammer and nail analogy.
I personally think of it as the kid who got a Bibi gun for Christmas and pegs himself in the eye (can’t remember the name of the movie).

derpistan

If you are an o.g. boxing trainer I have no doubt you can make a man out of most of us. We have been trained by feminists that trying to appeal through muscles is lame. Yet we see it works every day. How to rectify the competing concepts?

Russ in Texas

Lokland.

Yup. Been there, done that, got the knife wound. Good women put out twice as much for ten times less drama. ymmv.

Russ in Texas

@derpistan.

No, I’m a guy who got the shit kicked outta me for ten years straight in a ring and would get WIPED by even the lowest of the amateurs…and woke up one day and realized “you know, actually, getting hit in the face is really good stress relief.”

Lokland

@derp

“Yet we see it works every day. How to rectify the competing concepts?”

Realize that there is no competition. There is what works and there is what does not work.

How someone feels about it is irrelevant.

That applies equally to Susan-dark game and feminists-masculinity.
(Though unlike feminists Susan is actually…you know…into dudes who act like dudes.)

Russ in Texas

Honestly, I think “quit listening to feminists” is perfectly valid advice all on its own, and plenty to start rehabilitating guys who’ve been fed a line of shit — and women, too.

@Abbot. Yeah, the Futurist laid out the economics quite well and convincingly, I thought.

Russ in Texas

@Susan#580: Right. So it’s way the hell too early for anybody to be bugging her yet.

derpistan

Susan – thanks for the update, you got through to her ; clapclap.

derpistan

“She didn’t really like you.”

A man would be lying if he said he never tried to punch above his weight, to borrow a fellow poster’s analogy. But you need something extra to punch above your weight. In my case I gamed someone accidentally, and only looking back 20 years later can I see what actually went down. But at least with the 3 Terrible R’s, I have a reason to genuflect what works, and what doesn’t, and why. I wasn’t being a dick to get in her pants (aka thinking ahead with game), I was being a dick because I was through. The only reason she fucked me is to deny the other woman I was going to fuck that night, to spite the other woman. THAT IS HOW CHICKS WORK. Edward Bernays ftw :/

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

The only reason she fucked me is to deny the other woman I was going to fuck that night, to spite the other woman. THAT IS HOW CHICKS WORK

There are actually women who aren’t into fucking men to spite other women, because they’re in relationships that are working. Even with my scandalous double digit count, I have never in my life had sex with a man for any reason other than that I wanted him badly.

I cannot imagine that being the “prize” in a game of female intrasexual competition is gratifying beyond the immediate physical release.

derpistan

I was dumb, I actually thought she liked me and was going to treat me different the next day after fucking me, like I actually had a chance. It was only the next day that I realized that my only prize was the booby prize, a nice fuck. Silly Betas.

derpistan

Susan: on another funny note, the woman at the next table that I got her number, I saw her at another concert six months later, she remembered me and came up to me, we dated for about two months before she told me I was a Goyim and she’s not allowed to marry a Goyim. That was that.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@derpistan

Susan: on another funny note, the woman at the next table that I got her number, I saw her at another concert six months later, she remembered me and came up to me, we dated for about two months before she told me I was a Goyim and she’s not allowed to marry a Goyim. That was that.

So the other woman was right – the woman at the next table thought you were hot. Pity about the religious difference…

derpistan

I didn’t even know what the word Goyim was until then :/ Anyway I enjoy your blog (I did find it through the 3 Terrible R’s(tm) ), I’m glad you got through to one person (Anne). I’m impressed she was able to get past all the hazing and find some truth in 600 and counting responses. That makes me smile. I’ll be rooting for her (and him), which is unusual. Cheers

ExNewYorker

“So if I deceive a women with the intent to get laid, it’s ok – so long as I am not conscious of it. Perfect!”

My cad brother the natural does this all the time. He also instills dread, freezes out, and flirts with other women. But he just does it naturally, without thinking about it. Not Machiavellian at all…

This reminds me of the whole sausage analogy…we all love hot dogs as long as we don’t know the details of how they come to be.

I guess you gotta fake it till you make it. Then you won’t be faking it at all…

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@ENY

My cad brother the natural does this all the time. He also instills dread, freezes out, and flirts with other women. But he just does it naturally, without thinking about it. Not Machiavellian at all…

No, I think we’d have to blame the sociopathy for that, with its characteristic low empathy.

You make a good point though – is a person blameless if they have no conscience? Or if they sincerely believe that bad is good? Or are physiologically incapable of any behavior that is not predatory? Generally, we do hold people accountable for their actions, so I’ll amend my statement to say that the woman who constantly shit tests without thinking about it is “wired” in such a way that makes empathy unlikely, and her satisfaction elusive.

In both cases, stay far away.

Jason

Beautiful, Intelligent or Sane, pick two.

Hmm. I’ll pick Beautiful and Sane. From my perspective there’s no difference between a 130 IQ and a 100 IQ, except the former thinks she’s intelligent.

Anne, as everyone is saying, if you actually want him to want you, eat that crow. He’ll walk otherwise.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Jason

From my perspective there’s no difference between a 130 IQ and a 100 IQ, except the former thinks she’s intelligent.

I have iq one hunnerd and ugreed with evryting u say. I am bootifull and san and cooking reel good. Chilly and mackronie. I also luv fuck! Fuck now big boy!

szopen

@underdog

your problem is with intent — not tactics

Yes. Because the intent makes clear whether you employing the tactics just to reach the goal, which is in itself moral – and therefore you probably would not use the tactics lightly.
Screaming at the child is bad thing, but it may be effective as temporary tactics when you badly need their attention. My son is trying to put a fork into a computer: scream, he throws the fork, tactics worked. However, since I used this tactic just as a last restort, you can be pretty sure that I don’t use it everyday. It does not make tactic good. That’s why intent always matters, as intent is the signal over the future uses of some dubious tactics.

szopen

@Russ in Tex

These guys remind me of an old adage that seems appropriate:“when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”

Yes, exactly. I think a lot of males have an inclination to build systems, which help understand the reality. This is a great thing actually, except when we start to overuse a system. If the system explains a lot and has a lot of inner logic, they guys tend to start explaining EVERYTHING in terms of that system, they tend to became blind to things which prove the system wrong, they tend to interpret reality in terms of their system.

It only gets worse with intteligent males, since they know they are intelligent, so they are pretty sure their system is good. Moreover, the more intelligent guy, the greater chance most of people he interacts with have lower IQ, hence the larger chance he become convinced he’s got it and when he meets a critique, he will going to assume that the critique is invalid because it surely was formulated by one of those idiots.

Hence, once a guy swallows the red pill, he is going to see everything in terms of game, and will ignore anything which is contrary to the game. E.g. woman can’t be attracted to beta’s; if woman is attracted to beta, then surely she is attracted to his alpha qualities or maybe she just want to use him. Even if a woman is atracted to beta, then she is not getting wet, so it does not really matter. And when most of woman don’t get wet for ANY sort of guy immedietely and they tend to explain that their attraction works differently, it’s because the woman don’t know themselves and it’s their hamster running.

Once you a logged in, you cannot leave.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@szopen

It only gets worse with intteligent males, since they know they are intelligent, so they are pretty sure their system is good. Moreover, the more intelligent guy, the greater chance most of people he interacts with have lower IQ, hence the larger chance he become convinced he’s got it and when he meets a critique, he will going to assume that the critique is invalid because it surely was formulated by one of those idiots.

This is a widespread phenomenon, even on display here at HUS. You nailed it, right down to the dismissal of experts with at least the same level of intelligence.

Hence, once a guy swallows the red pill, he is going to see everything in terms of game, and will ignore anything which is contrary to the game. E.g. woman can’t be attracted to beta’s; if woman is attracted to beta, then surely she is attracted to his alpha qualities or maybe she just want to use him. Even if a woman is atracted to beta, then she is not getting wet, so it does not really matter. And when most of woman don’t get wet for ANY sort of guy immedietely and they tend to explain that their attraction works differently, it’s because the woman don’t know themselves and it’s their hamster running.

Once you a logged in, you cannot leave.

The only thing you left out is that when a woman demonstrates that she does in fact work differently, she is branded an “outlier.” It sounds like some dystopian designation for the hinterlands. An outcast, a weirdo. Or else she’s treated as the Blessed Madonna of Mating, the one woman ever born without the sin of hypergamy.

This is why I concluded long ago that debate on certain topics among the “indoctrinated” is not productive.

szopen

@jason

From my perspective there’s no difference between a 130 IQ and a 100 IQ

Do you want to have high-IQ children?

szopen

Strange thing, I wanted yesterday to comment on one sentence Anne wrote in her letter, but had no time, and today I can’t find this fragment (or was it somewhere in comments? Or maybe I mixed taht with the previous letter from Karen?). Seems I started to have hallucinations … But then I wanted to recommend to remove that sentence anyway :D.

Good thing for Anne is that she’s just 22. Her market value will raise for the next 8 years. Got plenty time to make mistakes. The only danger is that she will not learn from her mistakes, but she seems not to be that kind of girl.

ANyway, I find it amusing that from the comments here, the game seems to be about faking the behaviour normal guys in the past just had (like self-respect).

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@szopen

Seems I started to have hallucinations … But then I wanted to recommend to remove that sentence anyway.

I did remove some content at Anne’s request, on the off chance that Stephen reads HUS. Highly unlikely, but you never know.

Just1Z

@Russ
my bad, it was late and I didn’t czech her nationality. too late to bed last night. in my defense, having listened to the pretty lady, it’s all greek to me.

(today is bad humour day, but then every day is bad humour day for me…and don’t say that you hadn’t noticed because I won’t believe you)

VD

If she gives you a blow job that she’s not sure she wants to give you, the attraction is already eroding. Sex with resentment is a malignant thing. There is no possibility for a good marriage when dread is in play

You’re missing the point. Dread is a means of STIMULATING ATTRACTION. It is also a means of potentially fixing a marriage where the woman has already lost attraction. The calm, well-intentioned reason you tend to advocate is an ideal, to be sure, but for most people, it is not a practical reality. What do you advise when attraction is already shaky, Install Dread, Suffer in Silence, or Nexting? Because in some cases, those are the options, unless you can suggest another one. Pointing and calling “DLV, DLV” isn’t so much wrong as irrelevant.

This is a misinterpretation of what I have shared here. I am actually very close to my father and see him as high value. I believe he was desperately unhappy with a bipolar wife, which is understandable. However, he never used the tactic of instilling dread. He is extremely charismatic, even now, and has always received a lot of attention from women. My mother was pissed because he enjoyed it, but the attention was a DHV. His soliciting it would have been a DLV.

Have you not repeatedly brought up your father as an example of the evils of Dread? And now you’re saying that he never used the tactic? Your father didn’t just magically receive attention; no man does. He solicited it, even if only passively, and more importantly, he did not deflect it. What you’re saying here is that Dread is a DHV if it is unintentional and a DLV if it is intentional. That makes no sense, because Dread concerns EFFECT, not INTENT. Dread Game, like all Game, is the synthetic imitation of the natural. Your father naturally instilled Dread. But doing so intentionally and synthetically is no more a DLV than a successful neg or a successful application of kino can be considered a DLV.

To be sure, a failed attempt to intentionally instill Dread would be a DLV. Why? Because it is a failed EFFECT. But a successful attempt to intentionally instill Dread can only be a DHV. This should be obvious, because if it was not indicative of perceived higher value, it would not work.

It’s understandable why you would have a strong distaste for Dread. But I think you need to look closely at the strength of your distaste for it and recognize that you are not analyzing the tactic with your usual detachment. There is not inherent separation between self-respect and Dread. Those with a high degree of self-respect will tend to naturally instill Dread because they are self-sufficient. They genuinely don’t need the approval of others, which tends to make others anxious and even hostile. Those with less self-respect may need to instill it with intent.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@VD

The calm, well-intentioned reason you tend to advocate is an ideal, to be sure, but for most people, it is not a practical reality.

Why is calm reason not a reality? We can train animals using positive, negative or intermittent reinforcement. Explaining your position in a rational manner is a way of delivering negative reinforcement, which will hopefully be followed by the opportunity to provide positive reinforcement. This should be effective with any creature with higher order thinking. The deployment of Dread is akin to the rat’s receiving a nasty electrical shock at the end of the maze instead of a piece of cheese. I reject any claim that women must be treated as feral creatures incapable of reason.

What do you advise when attraction is already shaky, Install Dread, Suffer in Silence, or Nexting? Because in some cases, those are the options, unless you can suggest another one. Pointing and calling “DLV, DLV” isn’t so much wrong as irrelevant.

Stephen seems to have figured it out. Attraction seemed shaky, he cut his losses and moved on. No tactics of the sort Roissy recommends. If you’re talking about Athol’s clients, that’s a different discussion, and I have seen Athol on occasion dip his toe in the Dread pool. However, the posts about Dread that I have cited and objected to were entirely focused on prophylactic maneuvering to keep the upper hand and send the woman into a sustained state of anxiety and jealousy.

I do not believe this is appropriate, but equally importantly it is not effective. I think it’s bad strategy because it sets up an entirely adversarial dynamic between two people, breeding resentment, conquest and fear. You might as well be Scheherazade at that point. There will be no joy.

That makes no sense, because Dread concerns EFFECT, not INTENT. Dread Game, like all Game, is the synthetic imitation of the natural. Your father naturally instilled Dread. But doing so intentionally and synthetically is no more a DLV than a successful neg or a successful application of kino can be considered a DLV.

To the woman on the receiving end of Dread, intent is key. Is my husband so charismatic and funny that women gather round him at parties? (Yes, Mrs. Walsh, he is.) How does he handle that? Is he smarmy, touching them and winking, drunkenly making suggestive remarks, or is he aware of his magnetism, even enjoying it, while maintaining integrity and respecting his marriage? The wife of this man will be well aware of his SMV regardless of his response. The former breeds resentment, as it publicly humiliates the wife (Mrs. Walsh went home early, will weep and yell and refuse to have sex for weeks.) The latter approach reinforces the wife’s belief that she has won the top prize – she will feel proud of her accomplishment and motivated to appreciate this man who other women find attractive.

If you have to instill Dread, then you’re admitting that other women do not, in fact, find you attractive. You have to make up Russian exes who give good head and phone calls with loud sounds of revelry in the background. Do you not see something pathetic about a man’s getting out of his quiet car and entering a packed bar to call his girlfriend or wife? If he’s a man with those options, he doesn’t need to manufacture them – his wife will be well aware. If he’s not, she already knows it or will figure it out very quickly. This is why Dread is not effective strategy as more than a jump to the battery of a clunker.

Those with a high degree of self-respect will tend to naturally instill Dread because they are self-sufficient. They genuinely don’t need the approval of others, which tends to make others anxious and even hostile. Those with less self-respect may need to instill it with intent.

A far better strategy would be to do the work of developing self-respect. I imagine that Dread corrodes a man’s self-respect, thereby worsening the problem. Unless he’s truly Dark Triad, he will not enjoy the Machiavellian approach, nor be able to sustain it. If he is, well then he’s writing blog posts instead of reading them.

VD

ANyway, I find it amusing that from the comments here, the game seems to be about faking the behaviour normal guys in the past just had (like self-respect)

Do you still not understand what Game is? It is the intentional imitation of the naturally successful. Not the normal, the successful.

I’ll pick Beautiful and Sane. From my perspective there’s no difference between a 130 IQ and a 100 IQ, except the former thinks she’s intelligent.

The former is intelligent. The problem is that she thinks she’s a genius and smarter than everyone else, including her cognitive betters.

Jason

The former is intelligent. The problem is that she thinks she’s a genius and smarter than everyone else, including her cognitive betters.

Good point.

Underdog

@Susan

“Women are attracted to men who signal “good genes.” Looks are very important to women. They look for symmetry, strength, and signs of a strong immune system. If you don’t accept that, you’re kidding yourself.”

If looks were important to women, then young, healthy looking guys who act like chumpy betas would be getting laid everywhere — but they are not (I believe most guys can back me up on this). Looks are not the defining factor when it comes to men, Susan. Behavior/status/dominance are.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Underdog

If looks were important to women, then young, healthy looking guys who act like chumpy betas would be getting laid everywhere — but they are not (I believe most guys can back me up on this). Looks are not the defining factor when it comes to men, Susan. Behavior/status/dominance are.

I don’t know whose Kool Aid you’re drinking, but you’re seriously misinformed. Ugly rich men do well, yes. Why? Because Occupational status is the strongest female attraction cue of all. Rich guys are at the top of that pyramid, that’s a huge head start in scoring the weighted formula of female attraction. Status is made up of dominance and prestige, and women select much more strongly for prestige.

Women do like dominance – the popularity of romance literature proves that. However, the dominance is always coupled with good character in female fantasy, or involves a woman’s bringing out the best in a man of formerly bad character. Women want the benevolent alpha, not the asshole. In the absence of the former, some women do go for the latter, usually with unfortunate results.

Looks are important. The top males are handsome. I do in fact know handsome betas who are capable of getting ONSs – where they have difficulty is in sustaining attraction, because they act chumpy. Also, a lot of them don’t really want ONSs – they’re not wired for them. Or so I hear.

Looks are not as important for women as for men – maybe they account for 25-50% of attraction rather than 75%, depending on other factors. But a guy who scores a low rating in the “looks factor” will have a hard time making that up elsewhere to win.

Damien Vulaume

Underdog.
The examples you take are a poor choice. It equals to saying this: All women are gold diggers…
Besides, a gold digger having the option to choose between D. Trump and a billionaire that looks like, say, Hugh Grant, who do you think she’s more likely to pick?
Young and healthy looking doesn’t mean good looking. Looks DO matter for women. The major difference between men and women regarding the importance they attach to looks is that, with women, the good looks of any guy quickly fades if, when he opens his mouth, he sounds as eloquent as Dan Quayle on a bad day.

derpistan

“game seems to be about faking the behaviour normal guys in the past just had (like self-respect).”

Guys had more self respect in the 80’s and 90’s? Hrm let me dig out my creepers, my skull bolo tie, knox gelatin and eyeliner out of the attic and get back to you.

JP

“To summarize, -game works-, -game over-.”

Where did I say that brute force social engineering hacks don’t “work”.

Oh, that’s right.

I didn’t say that.

derpistan

Oh I just found my china flats and my cassettes of my Heaven 17 12″ remixes (they sold for a shitload on ebay back in 2000), I’m feeling much more respectable already.

Underdog

@Damien Vulaume

“It equals to saying this: All women are gold diggers…”

No, it equals to saying all women are dominance diggers. Money, fame, social status, etc. are just various forms of dominance. I can name some ugly, awkward looking PUAs who get beautiful women solely from using behavioral dominance if you’d like.

JP

@szopen:

“Yes, exactly. I think a lot of males have an inclination to build systems, which help understand the reality. This is a great thing actually, except when we start to overuse a system. If the system explains a lot and has a lot of inner logic, they guys tend to start explaining EVERYTHING in terms of that system, they tend to became blind to things which prove the system wrong, they tend to interpret reality in terms of their system.”

They are more models than systems.

In other words, the map isn’t the actual territory.

There will always be better models.

derpistan

“Where did I say that brute force social engineering hacks don’t “work”.”

You certainly made it sound like there are more eloquent or ‘respectable’ ways to win over beautiful women, while denigrating what actually works. I’m sure your route leads to a much more fulfilling life, please Cassanova, do tell your privy secrets. Perhaps your own blog even.

Damien Vulaume

@Underdog
The dominance thing is another story. It has nothing to do with the “looks factor” we’re talking about.
@Tasmin #474
The most perfect analysis of the Anne/Stephen “relationship”. And very well put.

Underdog

@Damien Vulaume

“The dominance thing is another story. It has nothing to do with the “looks factor” we’re talking about.”

I don’t think you’ve been paying attention then. We’ve been discussing the importance of looks vs behaviors when it comes to male attractiveness this entire time.

Lokland

@Susan

“I have iq one hunnerd and ugreed with evryting u say. I am bootifull and san and cooking reel good. Chilly and mackronie. I also luv fuck! Fuck now big boy!”

I believe this might be a slight misrepresentation of average.
However, Jason does have a valid point.

http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

“I have iq one hunnerd and ugreed with evryting u say. I am bootifull and san and cooking reel good. Chilly and mackronie. I also luv fuck! Fuck now big boy!”

LOL. Jesus, Susan, you are in rare form today!

Russ in Texas

Unfortunately, VD appears to have missed my query. But generally….
If “outliers” crop up on a semi-regular basis, that is, ALWAYS a sign that a given model/system/paradigm is culturally or subculturally bound.

Game defined as “let’s understand intersex psychology” doesn’t strike me that way. The more pickup-y versions, otoh, tend to — they TEND to seem to describe women in a given culture (London, Paris, US SWPL territories, east and west coasts, and cultural “island cities” such as Dallas). Their understanding of how *most* women work psychologically may be universal, but the model fails flatly in a number of other areas (rural flyover country, especially the Midwest, East-Central and Eastern Europe*, Brazil**, Japan***, etcetera).

*Where men tend to treat women very dismissively and cad-like behavior (especially in Russia) tends to be the norm; some of your classic “beta” behavior that gets you nowhere in the States can get you laid like a KING if you’ve got substance to back it up.
**Where feminists absolutely exist but where the male/female dichotomy is much more openly accepted, and acting like a man w/o being a cad (plus a willingness to dance) is openly appreciated
***Where, outside of the club venues, women chase the men and the rules are simply very different from the western world.

Ted D

Susan – “Why is calm reason not a reality?”

Because by and large, people are simply NOT reasonable. And, as you and others have told me in many different ways: in general, women DO NOT respond positively to logic and reason, because it doesn’t make them “feel” good. If a guy is dealing with a woman that is already unhappy with him, do you honestly believe him logically outlining his grievances will get him anywhere at all?

My wife is certainly reasonable and logical, but for the most part not at all when she is upset. If we were on the rocks for some reason, the LAST thing I should do is try to reason with her, because it simply won’t work.

If you are imagining a scenario where two people in a relationship that is overall going well run into a snag, your approach is probably the best. (unless one or both of them are already emotionally upset.) A civil and unemotional conversation might do the trick to correct such a snag.

But, most guys in relationships that resort to dread ARE NOT currently in a happy relationship. In those cases, trying to appeal to his GF/Wife’s reason will fail, because she has already tuned him out. Then dread becomes a useful tool, and that is why Athol has “dipped his toes” into that pool as you said.

In terms of using dread in the early stages of a relationship? That is a risky gambit, because unless she is really into you, there isn’t much for her TO dread. Of course, a man doing so does send a message that says “you aren’t THAT special, cupcake”, and women used to being the “prize” often find that attitude entirely intriguing. She wants to know why this man isn’t hypnotized by her “magic vagina” and in some cases it will prompt her to pursue. (as we see in Anne’s case to an extent) It takes a man with a very outcome independent view, and one that is confident he can and will find another women in short order. And it is damn hard to deny that such a man IS indeed attractive to many women.

In terms of self-confidence vs. “faking” it? I agree with you there, but the reason ‘fake it til you make it’ is popular on the ‘sphere is: it works. The morality of it aside, game simply works. Will it work on all women exactly the same? Hell no! Which is why guys that dedicate themselves to racking up numbers learn lots of different techniques to reel them in. And honestly, even hard core PUAs will admit that they don’t score all the time. They get shot down a lot, but instead of being crushed they simply move to the other end of the bar and start over.

Do I want to be that man? Nope. But that doesn’t mean that I can’t learn something from him that I can use to further MY agenda, and in that way I can take something seen as negative like “dread game” and turn it into something positive: a way to save a marriage. You don’t have to like it (Lord knows there is a LOT about the Red Pill I don’t like), but you can’t deny that it works. And, once you come to grips with that fact, it is simply a matter of deciding your morality about its use and moving on.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

women DO NOT respond positively to logic and reason, because it doesn’t make them “feel” good.

But Dread does make them feel good?

If a guy is dealing with a woman that is already unhappy with him, do you honestly believe him logically outlining his grievances will get him anywhere at all?

He is not appealing to her for understanding. He is simply stating what he is willing to do and what he is not willing to do. If she’s lost all attraction and is ready for divorce, might as well rip off that band aid. I can guarantee you that a husband saying that he will not tolerate certain behavior is more effective than his stooping to her level of bad behavior.

But, most guys in relationships that resort to dread ARE NOT currently in a happy relationship.

You’re moving the goal posts. Dread as preached by Rollo and Roissy is to be deployed early and often, throughout a relationship. Let’s take this at face value.

1. Which Roissy dread tactics do you think are OK to use against a woman as insurance against future indifference?
2. Which ones are OK to use against a wife who is no longer sexually attracted to you?
3. How long do you think these effects can last? Once you go down the Dread road, can you get off? Are periodic “boosters” required?
4. How can you demonstrate that you are attractive to other women if you’re not?

Lokland

” Is my husband so charismatic and funny that women gather round him at parties? (Yes, Mrs. Walsh, he is.) How does he handle that? Is he smarmy, touching them and winking, drunkenly making suggestive remarks, or is he aware of his magnetism, even enjoying it, while maintaining integrity and respecting his marriage?”

I’m always curious what we make of these woman’s husbands.
Are the women instilling dread by flocking to another man?

I suppose the intent is not dread but merely subconscious attraction which makes it acceptable, no?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

I’m always curious what we make of these woman’s husbands.
Are the women instilling dread by flocking to another man?

I suppose the intent is not dread but merely subconscious attraction which makes it acceptable, no?

If they have any self-respect they’ll be giving some negative reinforcement of their own. When I am in the presence of a man like that (who, by the way, is often popular with other men too) I enjoy his company at my husband’s side. In the unlikely event he singled me out, I would extricate myself very quickly.

Frankly, more often than not some guy thinks he’s all that, putting his hand on our lower backs, telling us how fetching we look tonight, winking and insinuating himself, when he is actually completely unattractive. I suspect most of the men trying to induce Dread come off like this. The wife winds up humiliated, because her husband’s behavior is both disrespectful and creepy.

Damien Vulaume

Russ
“Their understanding of how *most* women work psychologically may be universal, but the model fails flatly in a number of other areas (rural flyover country, especially the Midwest, East-Central and Eastern Europe*, Brazil**, Japan***, etcetera).”
+1. That needed to be adressed.

http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

Re: Dread. I think this may be a case where the Natural is capable of generating a certain sense of dread simply because he really does have many options (and his partner will continually be reminded of this by the environment), while the Artificial who does not necessarily have many options may feel that he should act in a deliberate, somewhat theatrical manner to create these reminders.

My intuitive sense is that even the real LTR Nice Guys of the SMP probably should have some “bad boy” tactics, techniques, and procedures held back in reserve, as unfortunately *some* people only seem to really understand and respect sex, violence, money, and dominance and will keep testing and probing until they are satisfied.

The hybrid that results may actually be liberated from having to employ the hard skills, in the same way that MMA-trained law-enforcement officers have fewer use-of-force complaints and suits against them because they have more “command presence” (vis-a-vis looking like fighters, in shape, etc.) and are more confident in their abilities to handle physical escalations.

It’s kind of an auto-recursive, catch-22 situation: the guy who has options will know it and so will his partner, so he will have a bit more confidence and she’ll have a bit more insecurity, so a stable strategic detente may result.

OTOH, the guy who does not have options will also know it and so will his partner, so he will have more insecurity and she may be more brazen in her testing of him. There may be a couple of ways he could play this: one would be to display the ability to walk away from the relationship because he’s perfectly satisfied with being alone (this wouldn’t be “Dread Game” as described here because it wouldn’t involve another woman; it would be based on the man’s emotional self-sufficiency), while a different path would involve displaying an ability to walk away because he has other women available—women who would presumably value his time and attention and treat him better than he was being treated currently.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@BB

It’s kind of an auto-recursive, catch-22 situation: the guy who has options will know it and so will his partner, so he will have a bit more confidence and she’ll have a bit more insecurity, so a stable strategic detente may result.

Exactly. It’s quite easy to appear to have options when you actually have them. Not so easy to manufacture them a la The Wizard of Oz, where there is nothing behind the curtain.

OTOH, the guy who does not have options will also know it and so will his partner, so he will have more insecurity and she may be more brazen in her testing of him. There may be a couple of ways he could play this: one would be to display the ability to walk away from the relationship because he’s perfectly satisfied with being alone (this wouldn’t be “Dread Game” as described here because it wouldn’t involve another woman; it would be based on the man’s emotional self-sufficiency), while a different path would involve displaying an ability to walk away because he has other women available—women who would presumably value his time and attention and treat him better than he was being treated currently.

How could he pull off the second approach when you’ve just said he does not have options. How does he manufacture a real option when women are not gravitating toward him? By flirting with other men’s wives at the church pot luck? Goosing your best buddy’s wife when he’s not looking? Leering at the boss’s daughter at the company picnic?

I don’t understand how to create the appearance of options when a woman can see with her own eyes how women respond to her husband. I know precisely how my husband ranks among women. I know exactly how many days would pass before he was inundated with female attention, were I to die or divorce him.

It seems to me that if a man is unattractive to his wife, he would be better served by making himself more attractive via inner game than relying on behavioral correlates that are easily dismantled by any observer.

Lokland

@Susan

“If you have to instill Dread, then you’re admitting that other women do not, in fact, find you attractive. You have to make up Russian exes who give good head and phone calls with loud sounds of revelry in the background. Do you not see something pathetic about a man’s getting out of his quiet car and entering a packed bar to call his girlfriend or wife?”

Most men do not nor will ever have options.
Regardless of how much game they learn the best a majority of men are going to do is one girlfriend at a time with periods of loneliness in the middle (see delta, >50% of pop.).

If the requirement to maintain a relationship is the availability of options and most men do not have those the result must of course be to convince ones partner that you actually do have options when in fact you do not.

Dread works quite well for this purpose.

Of course, you and gamers make the mistaken assumption that what occurs at the top of the pyramid can be applied throughout.
Most women have more options than men but even then are not plentiful.
They usually do not require their man to have options or else they would be perpetually single or getting P&D’d by high value men.

This talk of options being required only applies to very attractive women.
Which constitute only a small percentage of the population.

Russ in Texas

Bastiat,

“My intuitive sense is that even the real LTR Nice Guys of the SMP probably should have some “bad boy” tactics, techniques, and procedures held back in reserve, as unfortunately *some* people only seem to really understand and respect sex, violence, money, and dominance and will keep testing and probing until they are satisfied.”

Bastiat, those “real LTR Nice Guys of the SMP” have a phrase for said women. It’s called “damaged goods,” and they generally avoid them, gradually NEXTing them if one slips under the radar.

Lokland

“women DO NOT respond positively to logic and reason, because it doesn’t make them “feel” good.

But Dread does make them feel good?”

No.
A woman who does not feel good will not do what you want anyway.
Feels right would be a better description.

Dread is used to re-assert attractiveness which then enables the women to feel right about sexing up her husband.
Fucking the unattractive schlub is the worst thing that could ever happen to her in terms of evolution.

Logically explaining why she should be attracted is only good if your trying to troll her before divorce because she is not attracted to you and every word you say is disregarded because your unattractive.

Underdog

@Susan

There you go. Looks is not the defining factor for male attractiveness. A great deal of other factors trump his physical attractiveness — most notably dominance.

That was pretty much my original point: A female increasing her physical attractiveness, therefore, is not the equivalence of a male increasing his physical attractiveness. But it is the equivalence of a male increasing his dominance — whether it be socially (money, status) or behaviorally (game).

Lokland

@Susan

“If they have any self-respect they’ll be giving some negative reinforcement of their own.”

Not sure I comprehend this.

“When I am in the presence of a man like that (who, by the way, is often popular with other men too) I enjoy his company at my husband’s side.”

So a bunch of men bring their wives to a guy whom she is more attracted to than themselves? Perhaps its lost on me but to what purpose does this action lend itself? An interesting dynamic but I can’t see any positive gain for the husband.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

So a bunch of men bring their wives to a guy whom she is more attracted to than themselves? Perhaps its lost on me but to what purpose does this action lend itself? An interesting dynamic but I can’t see any positive gain for the husband.

They’re not bringing their wives to a guy, they’re bringing them to the holiday party. It just so happens that Tom Brady is going to be there. Tough shit. If your wife loves you she’ll be gracious and circumspect. Which is exactly what you should be if the most beautiful woman you’ve ever seen enters the room. This is the only appropriate behavior. People should not make spectacles of themselves, especially with the opposite sex while in a relationship. It’s selfish and cruel. It’s the deliberate humiliation of another person for your own ego gratification.

Alternatively, you could refuse to socialize with attractive people. I would not enjoy that approach.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

“If they have any self-respect they’ll be giving some negative reinforcement of their own.”

Not sure I comprehend this.

“The way you behaved tonight in the presence of that Channel 7 weatherman was unacceptable. You were undignified and silly. You shamed me. Do not do that again. I will be sleeping in the guest bedroom tonight.”

Lokland

“Frankly, more often than not some guy thinks he’s all that, putting his hand on our lower backs, telling us how fetching we look tonight, winking and insinuating himself, when he is actually completely unattractive.”

Yes I know these guys.

Not what I am thinking of.
I’m thinking more like star QB.

Ted D

Susan – “You’re moving the goal posts. Dread as preached by Rollo and Roissy is to be deployed early and often, throughout a relationship”

I actually addressed that in the next paragraph. The guy sending the “not special” message? yeah, sorry to say, I’ve seen that work with my own eyes. Truthfully it made me mildly sick to my stomach, but it got a particularly hot woman to chase a douche.

Lokland just explained the why of it above. No, dread will not make a women “feel good”, but if she is already not “feeling good” about you, then you have little to lose by pushing the envelope a bit. And, in doing so, while making her “feel bad” you might also trigger her to start being attracted TO you, even while she is angry AT you. Yes, I’m saying that intentionally pissing off your GF/Wife can sometimes cause a positive behavior. Would I do it? Not unless my wife really pushed me. But, before I’d “just rip off the band-aid” I’d certainly try running dread on her. And, I’d do it fully believing that it was the best thing I could do FOR HER, because I firmly believe that staying in our marriage IS what is best for her.

Had I know any of this before my divorce, I’d have gamed the shit out of my ex-wife before I gave up on the marriage. As I’ve said many times, I’m not complaining that I didn’t save it, because I would have had to continue that level of “game” to keep the marriage sound in the long run. But, as someone that took those vows seriously, I would have gamed her to the end of the earth before I gave up.

Iggles

@ SW:

The only reason she fucked me is to deny the other woman I was going to fuck that night, to spite the other woman. THAT IS HOW CHICKS WORK

There are actually women who aren’t into fucking men to spite other women, because they’re in relationships that are working

THIS.

All these generalizations are really annoying.. NAWALT!

I have never competed over a guy. I don’t see the point. If he’s into you he will invest in you, doesn’t matter who else likes him. He will shut her down. If he doesn’t then that tells you all you need to know! Why make “winning” the guy’s affections about beating another woman?

Susan is right, girls who do that are about feeding their ego/getting male validation. I guess that’s fine if you’re into that sort of thing.. but you are just a walking penis and can easily be replaced by another guy. The relationship is built on a foundation of sand.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

you are just a walking penis and can easily be replaced by another guy. The relationship is built on a foundation of sand.

Yup, though it’s more like swamp muck when these kinds of tactics come into play.

Deli

2 Russ in Texas
Crap, all that time I was reading your comments and thought that Russ was short for Russel, while it must have been short for Рус

Sai

@Susan
“I have iq one hunnerd and ugreed with evryting u say. I am bootifull and san and cooking reel good. Chilly and mackronie. I also luv fuck! Fuck now big boy!”
Part of me finds this funny and part of me finds it mean. Either way, you’re a better actress than I am.
(Then again, I don’t get romance novels.)

Lokland

@Susan

“They’re not bringing their wives to a guy, they’re bringing them to the holiday party. It just so happens that Tom Brady is going to be there.”

No you quite specifically said him not party. I’ve been to many parties and not talked to certain individuals for a multitude of reasons.

“If your wife loves you she’ll be gracious and circumspect.”

Would you define the flocking behaviour described prior as gracious and circumspect?

“Which is exactly what you should be if the most beautiful woman you’ve ever seen enters the room. This is the only appropriate behavior.”

How did I get dragged into this? I specifically avoid talking to women in a non-professional context.
Also, behavioUr.

Sai

“The way you behaved tonight in the presence of that Channel 7 weatherman was unacceptable. You were undignified and silly. You shamed me. Do not do that again. I will be sleeping in the guest bedroom tonight.”
That’s pretty eloquent. I was thinking more of “you acted like a tramp and I can’t even look at you right now.”

Lokland

“The way you behaved tonight in the presence of that Channel 7 weatherman was unacceptable. You were undignified and silly. You shamed me. Do not do that again. I will be sleeping in the guest bedroom tonight.””

So he;
a) got embarrassed
b) made himself sleep on the couch
c) isn’t getting laid

Racking up the wins.
Better approach.
Inappropriate speech—->Emotionless sex—–> Now you can sleep on the couch tonight.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Better approach.
Inappropriate speech—->Emotionless sex—–> Now you can sleep on the couch tonight.

Haha, you win. That is a better approach. Either way the object is to deny her what she wants or should want. Emotionless sex should do it!

Russ in Texas

@Lokland.

Yeah, it’s very sad, but you’re right: one-relationship-vs-lonely is what a number of folks have on the table.

But, and we’re leaving your “triad” guys aside here for a moment, a ONS, gamed or not, will often make guys like this feel WORSE rather than better, precisely because it’s devoid of the relationship they actually want.

Lokland

@Sai

“That’s pretty eloquent. I was thinking more of “you acted like a tramp and I can’t even look at you right now.””

+1

Tramp and slut would probably be involved in any spiel I had to give (which I have not).

Russ in Texas

@Lokland again.

“Where are you going?”
“I’m absolutely disgusted by your tramp-like behavior this evening. Good night.” ::goes to couch::

She nests. She thinks of it as “her bed” *because* she nests. And you just indicated that her nest is full of cooties and slime. For any woman you’d want to be with, this is a truly thermonuclear move. Any woman for whom this doesn’t immediately set off a six-alarm fire, that’s your cue that the relationship is over and it’s time to cut bait.

Sassy6519

To the woman on the receiving end of Dread, intent is key. Is my husband so charismatic and funny that women gather round him at parties? (Yes, Mrs. Walsh, he is.) How does he handle that? Is he smarmy, touching them and winking, drunkenly making suggestive remarks, or is he aware of his magnetism, even enjoying it, while maintaining integrity and respecting his marriage? The wife of this man will be well aware of his SMV regardless of his response. The former breeds resentment, as it publicly humiliates the wife (Mrs. Walsh went home early, will weep and yell and refuse to have sex for weeks.) The latter approach reinforces the wife’s belief that she has won the top prize – she will feel proud of her accomplishment and motivated to appreciate this man who other women find attractive.

If you have to instill Dread, then you’re admitting that other women do not, in fact, find you attractive. You have to make up Russian exes who give good head and phone calls with loud sounds of revelry in the background. Do you not see something pathetic about a man’s getting out of his quiet car and entering a packed bar to call his girlfriend or wife? If he’s a man with those options, he doesn’t need to manufacture them – his wife will be well aware. If he’s not, she already knows it or will figure it out very quickly. This is why Dread is not effective strategy as more than a jump to the battery of a clunker.

I agree Susan.

Lokland

@Russ

Hmm interesting.
Never thought of that.

http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

Susan, I agree that men frequently fuck this up and become subjects of ridicule. I think that the more savvy “Artificial Options” players are going to try to find subtle ways to create this sense of optionality, while the less-savvy are going to try the thuggish gropes, transparent alpha-mimicking social gambits, and heavy-handed flirting that you mention— or, perhaps just as bad, the self-proclaimed “I have options” speech.

I agree that it is much better to actually have the options and to let the environment carry the threatening big stick for you, but most guys just don’t have this. If a relationship starts to go sideways on them, they may try the honest communication approach and find that the woman responds poorly—perhaps she really does want confirmation that her man is attractive, a catch, etc. and won’t be satisfied by hearing him talk about how her testing is making him feel. Perhaps she’ll even think that it makes him look weak. Who knows. I don’t think a woman is necessarily being sadistic by conducting these types of probes; it may not be her conscious choice, really (just as some types of bad behaviors are going to naturally emerge from men if they are placed in certain situations).

Long-term, a man could ingest the so-called red pill—the realization that women ultimately respect and need male strength—and go about addressing his weaknesses through study and training and so on, but in the short-term he could just feel like chopped liver.

I wish these stupid reindeer games were not part of relationship mgt and envy relationships that don’t feature them, but IME the same basic scripts seem to come up time and time again.

Russ in Texas

@Deli

Not Pyc, but spent some time in the area. Got more ass than a bus-stop bench, with insanely attractive women, from the “Deep Game Tactic” of acting considerately, looking at her eyes rather than her tits, and actually sharing ideas and listening to what she had to say.

Stole a good-girl 8 who was hidden in plain view under frumpy clothes and Birth-Control Glasses, and brought her home.

Ted D

Susan – “I don’t understand how to create the appearance of options when a woman can see with her own eyes how women respond to her husband. “

Easy: learn game. 😉

“The way you behaved tonight in the presence of that Channel 7 weatherman was unacceptable. You were undignified and silly. You shamed me. Do not do that again. I will be sleeping in the guest bedroom tonight.”

I call BS. I never, and I mean NEVER remove myself from my bed. If I’m that upset with my wife (and so far it has never happened *knocks on wood*) I would tell her if she didn’t want to sleep with me, that she could move herself to the guest room. I’m not giving up my comfort because she acted poorly.

Russ in Texas

@Ted,

Always, ALWAYS, have a comfortable couch. For general couch purposes.

VD

Why is calm reason not a reality? We can train animals using positive, negative or intermittent reinforcement. Explaining your position in a rational manner is a way of delivering negative reinforcement, which will hopefully be followed by the opportunity to provide positive reinforcement. This should be effective with any creature with higher order thinking. The deployment of Dread is akin to the rat’s receiving a nasty electrical shock at the end of the maze instead of a piece of cheese. I reject any claim that women must be treated as feral creatures incapable of reason.

Because it observably isn’t. This reminds me of all the macroeconomic models that rely upon rational expectations, which simply don’t exist and thereby wreck all of the practical applications. I don’t think anyone is saying that all women must be treated as feral creatures incapable of reason, only that once it is observed that a woman is incapable of reason in a given context, treating her as a feral creature will obtain better results. I, for one, always test to see if a woman – or a man, for that matter, is capable of reason and dialectic. Once it becomes clear that she – or he – is not, I simply switch gears and treat them accordingly. Why would you find that objectionable, much less ineffective, in any context?

I do not believe this is appropriate, but equally importantly it is not effective. I think it’s bad strategy because it sets up an entirely adversarial dynamic between two people, breeding resentment, conquest and fear. You might as well be Scheherazade at that point. There will be no joy.

I disagree, because the dynamic is already adversarial. Most women are happiest when they are submissive, when they find a man who defeats their little challenges, when they are conquered and taken. Dread is merely one of the many means of breaking a woman’s pride, and as such, can actually lead to long-term joy if implemented appropriately. Consider that you are actually advocating divorce and breaking up marriages and families instead of utilizing an intersexual tactic that you know makes an impact on women’s attitudes and behavior. I am not saying Dread is always effective or justified, only that it is a reasonable tool in the male arsenal.

If you have to instill Dread, then you’re admitting that other women do not, in fact, find you attractive.

You’re not understanding what Dread is. It is not the ex nihilo generation of false options, it is the implied threat to avail oneself of other options. Those options can be real or they can be manufactured for the hamster’s behalf. And real options will strike far more terror into a woman’s heart than imaginary ones.

A far better strategy would be to do the work of developing self-respect. I imagine that Dread corrodes a man’s self-respect, thereby worsening the problem. Unless he’s truly Dark Triad, he will not enjoy the Machiavellian approach, nor be able to sustain it.

One needn’t be Dark Triad, one need only be Machiavellian to enjoy it. Your imagination here is off-base due to your misconception of what Dread is. If my options are real, it doesn’t necessarily cost me any self-respect to allude to the possibility that I might avail myself of them… unless, of course, that violates my moral standards, in which case it would. But that is another matter entirely.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Those options can be real or they can be manufactured for the hamster’s behalf.

This is the crux of our disagreement. I do not believe that options can be manufactured. Women know precisely what their husband’s SMV is. They know it when they marry him, presumably assortatively, they know it when it slips, and they know it when it increases. A woman may take the temperature of how other women view her man at any time very easily.

Sure, a man could put lipstick on his own collar and slips of paper with phone numbers in his pocket. He may be able to give his wife a good scare. But he will not be able to pull this deception off for long. Unless he has her locked in the basement, she is going to understand very well what his market value is.

I do not promote divorce over marriages remaining together, I just don’t think the tool of Dread provides that stability, and certainly not a repair to a really troubled relationship. Dread is not about submission, it is specifically designed to produce “anxiety and jealousy,” and to keep your woman in that state perpetually, as far as I can tell, per Roissy and Rollo.

I consider the instilliation of Dread to be an immoral application of an amoral tool, which is Game. But just as importantly, I don’t think it works, unless by “work” you mean anxious and frightened wife who nervously offers you blow jobs every night. If that’s the objective, I can see that it would work for a brief time, as noted above.

Ted D

Russ in Texas – “Always, ALWAYS, have a comfortable couch. For general couch purposes.”

LOL. Very true. Our couch would work for a night, but for me it is a matter of principle. I wouldn’t kick my wife out of bed no matter how pissed I was at her, and I’ll be damned if I’m getting a crappy nights’ sleep because of it. I’m not a kid that can be sent to my room (or the living room. LOL) and I won’t act or be treated as one. If she is that upset, she knows where the couch is.

Deli

2 Russ
I am not disagreeing that having some “nice guy” traits can give you a head start back home in certain conditions, but consider that the allure of marrying someone with a green-“get out of this hellhole for free”-card maybe also played in your favor

Basically being a male foreigner, specifically an American, in Moscow is like being a HB9 girl in the States.
All you need to get laid is show up and be nice You can get scammed once or twice (Moscow is notorious for gold-diggers), but the competition will be fierce.

I work in the international company and my foreign colleagues really like being sent to Moscow. You live in the city center, you get all expenses paid and you are living the pussy-dream. Lucky bastards

Russ in Texas

Deli,

In many circumstances, that would be utter truth. I try to avoid Moscow for just that reason, actually. Most of my friends over there are Siberians with much better heads on their shoulders.

Sai

@VD
You know more about this than I do so I’m not calling you a liar… but why are most women happier to be conquered and have their pride broken?

Man, all this talk about dread and now I can’t get this song out of my head!

Just1Z

@Susan
“The way you behaved tonight in the presence of that Channel 7 weatherman was unacceptable. You were undignified and silly. You shamed me. Do not do that again. I will be sleeping in the guest bedroom tonight.”

what kind of pussy ‘punishes’ a wrongdoer by removing himself to the guest bedroom? definite loser behaviour.

Damien Vulaume

Ah, forced to make an other analogy again.

“Most women are happiest when they are submissive”
VD
“It is necessary, for their own good, to have the people submit by any means to the will of the party to defeat capitalist imperialism”
Klement Gottwald

Fifth Season

I know it’s very unlikely that Anne will read this, but this is what I would have said if I was an uninvolved-but-concerned party she came to for advice, or as the manosphere puts it, an “emotional tampon”:

When people play games in a relationship, they want to keep their distance (emotional and mental) from their partners. Sooner or later this scuppers any real romantic connection the two may have had, and will certainly build resentment among one or both partners. Trying to get someone to stay or become close to you via negative stimuli is like trying to get a dog to fetch you your slippers by beating or starving it–it may do what you want out of fear of getting hurt, but it won’t love you. By your account, it seems Stephen decided to cool it off to see what you would do next, because while you say he invested time with you, he had enough self-esteem to know when to pull back (and possibly move on) when you made it look like you didn’t want anything to do with him anymore.

You will have to honestly open up with him about your fears and experiences that led you to become suddenly cold, so as to restore any lost trust. This will involve becoming vulnerable, but don’t think of it as a surrender of power; think of it as a chance to give the two of you a chance to bond and further your emotional investment, a chance to open your hearts to one another and build love. If what you’ve told us about Stephen is true, then men like him don’t grow on trees. It would be a right shame to throw all this away if the two of you could be very happy together–you’d be playing the part of the “old flame” from Dan Fogelberg’s tragic Christmas song “Same Old Lang Syne.”

As for being defensive, this isn’t the Battle of Britain. The Luftwaffe isn’t coming and V2 missiles aren’t exploding over your head this very instant. It’s time to get your heart out of the air raid shelter–it isn’t fair to him that you’re acting as if he was the one who hurt you earlier, and it’s hurting your chances of romance. It is better to judge each man by his own merits (and misdeeds, if applicable) rather than think of him as just another cad out to hurt you. I’m sure you’d resent being called “just another dumb blonde” or “just another plastic pin-up girl” (no offense intended). If you want him to see you as you truly are, then why not grant him the same courtesy?

In short, it’s time for honesty and humility on your part. If indeed Stephen is a man of character, he’ll listen, understand, and hopefully, forgive you so as long as you don’t pull this kind of routine again. I hope the two of you end up spending a very beautiful Christmas together. The fact that so many women (and a few men) were wearing signs that read “It should have been me!” during the recent Royal Wedding highlights just how rare and precious a good intimate relationship truly is. But you don’t have to be a Prince Harry or a Kate Middleton to build one–don’t throw away that kind of chance, because it’s not something that Santa delivers.

——–

Something I’d like to ask Susan is whether Anne herself fits the stereotype, prevalent in the manosphere, that women only date up, not down. One of the reasons why so many men here have been throwing their “schadenfreude” at her is that they likely feel that “women in your league shoot me down all the time; why should I feel any sympathy when you get shot down?” or “women who refuse men left and right should get a taste of their own medicine.”

I’m not saying that Anne should have gone pub-hopping in the Elephant and Castle area (a low-income district of London most famously depicted as a breeding pit and training ground for violent chavs, yobs, and assorted scum in the Michael Caine film “Harry Brown”). Odds are she’d rather throw up in her drink than be continually subjected to the leers and pickup lines of ugly and drunken men. I’d just like to know if she’d be willing to date below her socioeconomic status if this relationship gets flushed down the bog, because just as a high SES is by no means a reliable indicator of the strength of one’s character, men of good character can be found in all parts of society.

Perhaps the beautiful women you said wished that someone could “make it through their filters” would do well to give more men of good character but outside of their SES fair chances. Most women resent being the target of a pump-and-dump; men likewise don’t want to be treated like cigarettes you light up and stub out at the drop of a hat. Certainly some men deserve to have a cigarette stubbed out in their drink, but why don’t those women give more promising men a chance to light their fires?

In the end, we are all ash in the wind, but we can always burn out more pleasantly with the right person.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Fifth Season

Welcome, and thanks for your insightful and thoughtful comment.

I’d just like to know if she’d be willing to date below her socioeconomic status if this relationship gets flushed down the bog, because just as a high SES is by no means a reliable indicator of the strength of one’s character, men of good character can be found in all parts of society.

Conventional wisdom says no. I think one factor is parental expectations. Anne actually mentioned that her parents would very much approve of this young man. And then there’s very real hypergamy, or at least the desire for assortative mating. I think there are areas of flexibility – but some sort of status equal or superior to the woman’s will usually be sought.

I’m not judging this one way or the other – but that’s my understanding. With college ratios in the U.S. quite lopsided and getting moreso, we will be able to have a front row seat as this plays out.

Russ in Texas

@Just1Z#659,

Frankly, I’m surprised that none of the PUA types here regard it as Dread Game material. As I told Lok, this is a truly thermonuclear move, and can easily reduce your spouse to a sobbing wreck. (hence, don’t pull shit **** casually for light cause)

Ted D

Susan – “But just as importantly, I don’t think it works, unless by “work” you mean anxious and frightened wife who nervously offers you blow jobs every night. If that’s the objective, I can see that it would work for a brief time, as noted above.”

In the case of a wife that has gone cold, it CAN help by giving her incentive to step up her game, so to speak. If she is simply not attracted to her husband, knowing he might just go out and snag himself a replacement for her might snap her out of whatever hamster induced haze she is in. If it doesn’t, then there was nothing left to save anyway, and at least the guy has a head start on finding that replacement.

Now I agree that this cannot be maintained for long, but who in their right mind would want to run dread indefinitely? In terms of relationship security goes, it would be completely counter productive. But, after a good dose of dread, if she were to come around, it would make sense then to move on to fixing whatever it was that caused the lack of attraction in the first place. If not, they would find themselves in the same place again in short order.

So, dread is a quick correction or last ditch effort technique IMO when it comes to LTR/Marriage. I’d say it is a lot like radiation: in some cases a dose or two can save your life, but repeated exposure is guaranteed to kill you. In small doses, dread can be a tool to cure a ‘sick’ marriage, but if it is the only tool used, the marriage will eventually die. Faced with divorce, I’d advise any man to run dread before they give up completely, that is IF they want to try and salvage it. If it fails, they were on their way to family court anyway. If it succeeds? One less divorce for the stats.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

So, dread is a quick correction or last ditch effort technique IMO when it comes to LTR/Marriage

As a last ditch effort I suppose trying to make your wife jealous by trying to fool her into thinking other women want you may be worth a try, but I am more than a little dubious of its efficacy.

She wants the man she married. If you’re not that man, get him back as quick as you can. And don’t wait until she looks at you with poorly disguised indifference, or worse, revulsion.

Russ in Texas

Wow. I’m such a potty brain that I typed **** and hatched-out “this” in reverse w/o even realizing it.

More coffee, yeah, yeah, that’ll fix it. ::facepalm::

deti

Ted 664:

I’ve been watching this debate on Dread between Susan, VD with interest. I think you’ve nailed how Dread works in a marriage. But it can also be effective in a relationship as well, particularly when, as VD said, you have a woman who has used manipulation or is playing fast and loose with the truth.

But no one’s listening to us anyway….

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

But no one’s listening to us anyway….

Male pouting is a DLV. Just saying.

Russ in Texas

Bit unfair ball, Deti, since I *did* ask a question directly but was ignored.

deti

Russ 663:

Telling your wife about her disrespecting you and then retiring to the guest room is not Dread. It’s beta. No self-respecting husband puts himself out of his own bed, or lets his wife kick him out. If she’s that upset, SHE can go sleep in the guest room.

deti

what’s your question Russ?

Russ in Texas

@Deti#s668/669,

If it’s beta, that’s fine. I don’t have a status to defend. What I know is that it works, and it’s so thermonuclear that I have to do it only when it’s absolutely an issue b/c its effect is so extreme.

Original question:

@VD#547,

This is the part that throws me:

Yes, it works. It ABSOLUTELY works, if executed correctly. But does that mean it’s necessarily the right tool for the job?

If a man’s crossed that oh so special line, I *could* bust his nose and reverse his knee as a way of getting him to see my point. Or, if I’m an actual reasonable human being, I might be able to fix the problem by sitting him down and buying him a beer.

Given the choice, wouldn’t the buy-him-a-beer non-nuclear option be preferred first?

Question to VD was: sure, let’s grant that Dread Game works. But many OTHER things work, as well.

Your question had to do with a man dealing with another man crossing the line. Either fisticuffs or reason can be the preferred tool, depending on the context.

Dread is a tool for addressing and responding to a woman crossing her man’s line. Different offender and offense calls for different tactics.

A man cannot use fisticuffs or brute force with a woman.

If a woman is in open rebellion, reason isn’t the best tactic. He can’t tell her she’s being illogical and unreasonable. That will simply escalate her anger. He has to do something to tamp down on the rebellion and gain some semblance of hand and leverage.

He can’t tell her she SHOULD be attracted to him because he’s oh so responsible and earns a good living. At this point she doesn’t care one bit about how great he is; her attraction is gone or never was there in the first place.

Keep in mind: She, not he, has brought things to a head through rebellion or pushback or dishonesty or disrespect. His response can’t be logical or premised on reason. She has drawn him onto her turf, and he has to respond using tactics that resonate with her, not him.

http://www.rosehope.com Hope

Question: if a woman refuses to put up with a man’s BS, and freezes him out, is she using Dread Game on him?

deti

Han:

there are many here who assign to me that designation, I am sure.

http://www.rosehope.com Hope

Russ, I like the dove vs. hawk analogy you gave earlier. I see our marriage as consistently dove meeting with dove, which is why things go so smoothly. We know the other is capable of hawk, but we tend to avoid other people and situations that call for it.

deti, I think when a marriage has gotten to that point, it’s basically emergency mode. If a man doesn’t live in that mode, he won’t “get it.” I agree that drastic measures are called for to respond to emergencies, but the best would be prevention and to not let things deteriorate that far.

Ted D

Russ in Texas – “Yes, it works. It ABSOLUTELY works, if executed correctly. But does that mean it’s necessarily the right tool for the job?”

Maybe, or maybe not. Personally dread would be a last ditch effort for me, but that is also because my wife has proven time and again to be much more reasonable than to NEED dread. My ex? Not so much. A good dose of dread and some decent game would have been the trick with her, had I known about any of it. Now? She is with a “good old boy” (and by that I mean an Ohio Red Neck kinda dude) that is rather chauvinistic and controlling, and she seems to be content with it.

I suppose the bigger question to me is: knowing what it would take to keep her happy, would I want to? Of course the answer now is hell no, I’m much better off today. But, back when I thought my world was ending because she wanted a divorce? I’d have tried anything, and probably failed because I would have tried anything…

Anyway to your question: is dread the right tool to use. I would say it depends on the woman’s personality/character, and the situation. I tend to believe that planning for disaster is the best way to avoid it, so to me knowing about “dread game” is simply another tool in my box of tricks should the occasion ever arise. Lord willing it won’t, but I hate to be caught with my pants down. 😉

Underdog

Sleeping in the guest room is not dread. Sleeping at a hotel is.

VD

You know more about this than I do so I’m not calling you a liar… but why are most women happier to be conquered and have their pride broken?

I don’t claim to know why. There are various theories, from the Biblical Curse of Eve to the various evo-psych fables. But it is readily observable that the woman whose pride is permitted to blossom unchecked by a man is usually miserable, whereas the woman who submits, either voluntarily or involuntarily, is usually happy. My impression is that this is because women tend to resemble herd animals who prefer following to leading and dislike being accountable for their decisions. But why that would be, again, I do not know. I simply observe.

This is the crux of our disagreement. I do not believe that options can be manufactured. Women know precisely what their husband’s SMV is. They know it when they marry him, presumably assortatively, they know it when it slips, and they know it when it increases. A woman may take the temperature of how other women view her man at any time very easily.

It’s an aspect of it, yes, but not the crux. If you believe that options cannot be manufactured, then how can one with genuine options possibly instill Dread? Your position is incoherent. If a man has options, then by your revised definition of Dread, he cannot instill it and no matter how fearful he makes his wife that he will pursue those options, it isn’t Dread. Do you really mean to assert that it is only Dread if she fears the nonexistent threat, but not the real ones?

If not Dread, then what would you term a woman’s fear of a genuine threat based on a real option? And since Game is the synthetic mimicry of natural behavior, what natural behavior does Dread Game imitate?

Sure, a man could put lipstick on his own collar and slips of paper with phone numbers in his pocket. He may be able to give his wife a good scare. But he will not be able to pull this deception off for long. Unless he has her locked in the basement, she is going to understand very well what his market value is.

This, too, makes no sense. A man need not feign an elevated SMV to instill Dread in a woman. Especially considering that women find it particularly insulting to be abandoned for women with observably lower SMV, the fact that she knows his market value doesn’t make him faithful. Even a lowly male 2 involved with a female 3 might instill Dread by demonstrating credible options with female 2s.

Given the choice, wouldn’t the buy-him-a-beer non-nuclear option be preferred first?

Of course. I always prefer a calm and rational discussion. And in my experience, about 10 percent of men and 2 percent of women do as well. I absolutely advocate civil discourse and sweet reason as an initial step. And my interlocutor happens to indicate that he prefers a knife fight, it is good to know that I have my .50 caliber Desert Eagle locked and loaded.

To be clear, I don’t utilize any Dread Game myself. I see no need for it. But I can understand the hypothetical situations where it could be utilized to master difficult women or salvage problematic relationships. Remember, relationships are dynamic. No tactic is always applicable or reliable.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@VD

I’m actually running out of town for the weekend, so can only be brief and then leave it there.

If you believe that options cannot be manufactured, then how can one with genuine options possibly instill Dread? Your position is incoherent. If a man has options, then by your revised definition of Dread, he cannot instill it and no matter how fearful he makes his wife that he will pursue those options, it isn’t Dread. Do you really mean to assert that it is only Dread if she fears the nonexistent threat, but not the real ones?

The woman who is married to a man with options is well aware of them. In many cases, I daresay, more aware than he is. She stays on her toes because she understands that if her husband loses attraction for her or becomes unhappy, he will readily find crying shoulders and soft arms to console him. IOW, the man with options has no need to ever instill dread, the same qualities that make him attractive to his wife will be presumed to affect other women similarly. We saw Anne say this very thing in her comment.

If a man with options is unhappy with his wife, he should tell her so. She should be able to get the synapses firing rapidly enough to link his unhappiness with his many options, of which she is already keenly aware by virtue of observing other women in his presence.

For the man who does not really have options, and whose wife is no longer attracted to him, how would he manufacture credible faux options? She will already be aware that his unattractiveness has produced pre-unselection. If he starts flirting and strutting with an asshole vibe, he’s just going to come across as an unattractive asshole.

In short, if you lose the attraction of your wife, and you can’t really produce women to make eyes at you in front of her, it’s game over. Your best shot is to do whatever it takes to become attractive to her again, especially in the area of dominance, as you suggest.

Even a lowly male 2 involved with a female 3 might instill Dread by demonstrating credible options with female 2s.

Agreed – my lipstick and love notes example may be used by a man of any SMV. The 2 wife will worry that he has a 2 mistress. If said mistress does not materialize in some generally recognizable form over time, she is going to sniff that out immediately.

But I think that most times when a woman loses attraction for her husband, it does reflect a declining SMV. Hers may be declining as well, in which case she’s being unrealistic, but it doesn’t change the fact that he no longer appeals.

Russ in Texas

@Hope,

You’re seeing what I’m seeing. I posted the *male-on-male equivalent* for purposes of discussion. Deti appears to be positing “dread” as a reactive rather than prophylactic action.

@Deti,

I think your theoretical assumptions don’t match my anecdotal ones (and this is a problem for *anybody’s* theoretical discussion since, as the old saw puts it, “the plural of anecdote is not evidence”). I have, in fact, and on more than one occasion with more than one woman, gotten the desired result precisely by doing exactly what you’re saying does not and cannot work. Quality women can comprehend “your behavior has endangered this relationship, and the ball is entirely in your court as to whether YOU are going to step up and fix it.” I don’t hang out with non-quality women; they’re a waste of my precious hours and seconds.

Underdog

@Hope

“if a woman refuses to put up with a man’s BS, and freezes him out, is she using Dread Game on him?”

She sure is. But then the question would be: does dread game usually work on men. The answer for that is in the original post.

Ted D

Hope – “Question: if a woman refuses to put up with a man’s BS, and freezes him out, is she using Dread Game on him?”

Perhaps. It would be more “dread” if she also went on more GNO and/or put herself in places where she is likely to meet and interact with other attractive men.

” I agree that drastic measures are called for to respond to emergencies, but the best would be prevention and to not let things deteriorate that far.”

Sure, and this was what I alluded to in my post to Russ above. Knowing what I do now, it really should be relatively simple to NEVER find myself needing to use dread in my marriage. I certainly hope so, because it would hurt me to intentionally hurt my wife. However, if it came to hurting her feelings briefly to get things under control or finding myself preparing for divorce #2, you can damn well be sure I’d be running dread like mad.

I find this line of thinking truly distasteful, but I refuse to limit my options and live in fantasy land where such tactics are never necessary. The only place that will get me is chumpsville. When it comes down to it, I’ll do what is necessary to protect myself and my family, even if that means hurting their feelings in the process.

Ted D

Russ in Texas – “Quality women can comprehend “your behavior has endangered this relationship, and the ball is entirely in your court as to whether YOU are going to step up and fix it.” I don’t hang out with non-quality women; they’re a waste of my precious hours and seconds.”

You are assuming that every man has the same definition for “quality women” which would likely be wrong. It seems that your ideal of “quality” hinges largely on a rather mature and self controlled woman, which is perfectly fine. But, by and large, that is NOT what all men are looking for in a mate, and to be frank you’d be damn hard pressed to find such a women in her early 20’s. My wife is in her 30’s, and well past being massively immature and unreasonable, but she herself has told me that she was NOT always that way, and in her 20’s would probably NOT have passed my ‘quality woman’ test, or yours.

My ex is a great person, truly a better person than me in fact. But, she is rather immature when it comes to relationships, and frankly a bit of a brat. I don’t like having to “control” bratty behavior, but didn’t have a clue as to seeing it as a red flag before we married. I pretty much assumed ALL women were bratty and went with it. I don’t know that she will ever change, so instead she hitched her wagon to a guy that is more than willing to treat her like a child when she acts like one. It is what it is…

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Ted

your ideal of “quality” hinges largely on a rather mature and self controlled woman, which is perfectly fine. But, by and large, that is NOT what all men are looking for in a mate, and to be frank you’d be damn hard pressed to find such a women in her early 20′s.

Two points:

1. Perhaps men should be more discriminating re character in a woman.

2. Early 20s is too early for most women to marry.

http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

I’m curious to know, how many of the men here have read a ‘light game’ book, like David Deida’s, “The Way of the Superior Man,” for example? I read it recently, and given that it came out in 1997, I’m left to wonder how much guys like Neil Strauss poached from that area of tantric yoga. It’s very full of concepts that are very gamey: men being masculine and establishing their own frame (i.e. purpose in life) and not supplicating to the whims of a women, social dominance, etc. It’s just that compared to Game it has a very positive message and reinforces the need for men and women to cooperate to fulfill their roles.

Does anyone know of similar books aside from Athol Kay’s work?

Russ in Texas

@Mr. Nervous Toes,

Similar ideas are universal to the western canon. I distinctly remember similar sentiments expressed in Nietzsche’s “on the uses and abuses of history.” Similarly, most western philosophers assume that a real man will examine the world around himself and test his acceptance of various hypotheses — one who accepts an idea — ANY idea — uncritically is a lesser man.

It occurs to me that we have no testimonials from men who have run Dread game. Ted thinks it might have worked had he tried it when his marriage was failing. Deti has previously shared some straight, harsh talk of the calm and reasonable variety.

Has any man here successfully convinced his indifferent wife that he was truly a catch and that other women would love to scoop him up, even if no such evidence of these other women existed?

We know that the tactic is decidedly Machiavellian, and we know that Machiavellian types of both sexes are wired for STRs, and generally fail at LTRs.

What evidence is there that this theory has ever worked? (The R’s don’t count.)

HanSolo

@Mr. Nervous Toes

I read Deida’s The Way of the Superior Man and really liked it.

I think his 3 scenarios–where you have a masculine husband and feminine wife, vice versa, and neutral husband and wife–are a bit to limiting and simplistic (and he even acknowledges this) but as long as the reader is willing to provide a little more imagination and take the general principles he gives and apply them to one’s own situation then it is a great read.

@Deti FWIW, I don’t find you diabolical

HanSolo

@Susan

Early 20s is too early for most women to marry.

I think this is mostly due to the culture not requiring maturation at an early age. Such maturation is possible but we have extended adolescence for both men and women. I’m generally of the opinion that children and young adults are more capable of responsibility and maturity when they’re expected of them but we live in a society where young people are too coddled and little is expected of them.

As an example from a more conservative subculture that promotes marriage and makes it seem like something very valuable for a woman to do (and not that Mormonism doesn’t have its flaws), my mom and sister both married at 20 and are going strong in their marriages many, many years later. My sister married her then 22-y/o fiance and both were still in college and finished.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@HanSolo

I think this is mostly due to the culture not requiring maturation at an early age. Such maturation is possible but we have extended adolescence for both men and women.

Absolutely. It is a question of what we require, and our expectations are that adults may not finish their education and be settled into a career until their mid to late 20s. We focus a lot these days on the delayed maturation of males, but it’s true for many females as well.

Mike C

I’ve been watching this debate on Dread between Susan, VD with interest.

Ha, me too…although I don’t think VD is going to make any headway at all with his arguments.

But no one’s listening to us anyway….

Male pouting is a DLV. Just saying.

Wow…really. That is pretty snarky, passive-aggressive attack there Susan. Just saying.

Deti, word of advice to you…and Ted. There is a certain relief you have when you simply stop giving a f*** about persuading someone of something who is not persuadable.

Damien Vulaume

@Mr.Nervous Toes:
You may want to try Kirkegaard’s “Either or”, which in short explores two alternatives “styles” of interaction with a woman.
Or Stendhal’s “De l’amour”, which in English is I think simply translated as “Love”. It’s an in depth psychological analysis of the woman’s psyche and emotions, as well as all the facets of what we call love: Carnal love, passionate love, courteous love, conventional love, etc. written in the romantic vein (by romantic I mean the first part of the 19th century). Most fascinating study.

VD

I’m actually running out of town for the weekend, so can only be brief and then leave it there.

No worries. First things first… have a Merry Christmas.

Russ in Texas

What concerns me there, Mike, is that if the theory dismisses outliers, is it a universally-applicable theory, or an exercise in confirmation bias/post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc thinking?

Most of these arguments are being answered with the assertion “it works.” But counter-arguments such as my own “it works” are being readily dismissed.

Good theory doesn’t dismiss outliers: it attempts to comprehend provide explanatory power *for them.* Good theory TRIES to fail.

Mike C

Susan,

Earlier upthread, you talked about the use of calm reason. I’m going to challenge you to head over to Rollo’s and at the very least watch the video excerpt of First Man Awake, and note the behavior and speech of many of the women protesters. I then want to know if you think they could be calmly reasoned with. I would argue what you see there is literally the apex of histrionic emotionality.

I think women vary in their ability to suppress emotional outbursts and emotions taking over higher level thinking JUST AS men vary in their ability to suppress anger taking over higher level thinking. When I was bouncing, there were certain guys who could be reasoned with and up to a point, but at some point the only language was physical.

Honestly, I think it is very unfortunate if a relationship gets to a point where games of brinksmanship have to take place. Ideally, it never gets to that point, but if you are in the relationship, and either cannot or don’t want to NEXT the relationship, then some short-term extreme measures may be called for to benefit the long-term. Chemotherapy makes you sick, but it gets rid of the cancer.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Mike C

Ideally, it never gets to that point, but if you are in the relationship, and either cannot or don’t want to NEXT the relationship, then some short-term extreme measures may be called for to benefit the long-term.

First of all, I will once again note that the goal posts have been moved. Rollo and Roissy both advocate for the instillation of dread as a preventative practice to be instituted and perpetrated from the start. This is what I have strenuously objected to all along. It has not been promoted by them as something as a last ditch effort to save a failing relationship, or to save a marriage to keep a family together, as Vox mentioned.

Chemotherapy makes you sick, but it gets rid of the cancer.

Because it kills the bad cells, right? So what is the source of the sickness when a woman loses attraction for her husband? The treatment cannot succeed unless it gets rid of the problem at its root. Has he let himself go? Is he uncommunicative? Does he work all the time and leave her on her own? Is he not an involved father? Has the sex become rote? Does he lack ambition? Is his career faltering due to his own lack of performance? Is he moody? Whatever the cause for her disinterest, that is what must be addressed. There is a reason she stopped wanting him. Fixing that is the only thing that might work, if it is not already too late.

I have yet to hear a single example of how men can convincingly conjure up attracted women in this situation. We hear a lot from men here about how few men women find attractive at all, and now we’re supposed to believe that a guy who cannot sustain the attraction of his spouse has a bunch of beauties waiting to take her place? It just doesn’t make sense to me. How would you go about instilling dread if your fiance confessed she no longer found you attractive and no longer wanted to have sex?

http://www.rosehope.com Hope

Self-control/future-orientation/willpower/maturity don’t just translate to better relationships. They help other things like better social ties, overall health, lower rates of overweightness/obesity, more conscientious parenting, etc.

Obviously both men and women vary in their levels of the aforementioned traits, but two high-trait individuals will have a much smoother relationship than any other combination. I think what people like Russ and Damien are saying is, if you are a mature, actualized person, why waste time on someone who needs constant correction?

deti

Mike C:

Yeah, between you and Hollenhund, and now Susan’s snark, message received.

The fact that Susan’s reading my posts and taking the time to snark at them indicates she’s listening, even if she’s not persuaded.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@deti

The fact that Susan’s reading my posts and taking the time to snark at them indicates she’s listening, even if she’s not persuaded.

I always read your posts and consider them thoughtfully, even when I disagree. I do not understand your getting butthurt over my saying something I have said to you on many previous occasions. I think your ideas about women are seriously off and not justified. I’ve explained why in each case. If you can substantiate your arguments I’m always willing to listen.

deti

“Male pouting is a DLV. Just saying.”

Losing an argument (again) with VD on your own blog is a DLV. Just saying.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Losing an argument (again) with VD on your own blog is a DLV. Just saying.

I have not lost an argument with VD. He is wrong, he just hasn’t admitted (or perhaps understood) it yet. The fact that Vox admits he’s never had to use dread proves my point. If a man has high SMV in his wife’s eyes, dread is unnecessary. If he doesn’t, she can’t feel dread.

Mike C

What concerns me there, Mike, is that if the theory dismisses outliers, is it a universally-applicable theory, or an exercise in confirmation bias/post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc thinking?

Most of these arguments are being answered with the assertion “it works.” But counter-arguments such as my own “it works” are being readily dismissed.

Good theory doesn’t dismiss outliers: it attempts to comprehend provide explanatory power *for them.* Good theory TRIES to fail.

Russ, I’m not sure if you are addressing me or a different Mike, but you raise some good points and questions.

First, let me say on the record that I would never say any theory is UNIVERSALLY applicable. That has never been my position. It is convenient for some to paint something that way, because it is easy to dismiss. I’d bet VD agrees with me. The running joke is that just about every statement a red-pill guy makes has to have NAWALT tacked on to the end of it otherwise it would be assumed the person is talking universal applicability.

JP had an excellent point that I am in full agreement with. The MAP is NOT the territory. Of course, in the real world, the objective is to navigate the territory to get from A to B. So even if a map has some errors in it, the answer isn’t to say “fuck the map, and throw it in the trash” and just say I am going to wing it and hope I find B. The issue is we have a lot of different maps, and everyone says there map is better, and tries to highlight the mistakes in the other person’s map. But if you are navigating the brutally treacherous terrain of intersex relations and mating/dating you’ve got to use some map knowing full well that ALL the maps have some mistakes or are maybe missing some aspect of the terrain. That said, there are better and worse maps, and there are some maps that some people have that show a big pretty blue pool where there is big lake of quicksand.

It gets further complicated because some people want to get from A to B while someone else is trying to sell someone on how to get to C never telling the person that. And then some people have financial interests in selling a certain map. It can get quite complicated.

deti

I’ll just leave this blast from the past here. Regulars will remember this isn’t the first time at this rodeo for Dread.

“In a marriage or LTR, the only time “dread” can really be effective is if she has already done something to destabilize the marriage/LTR and the husband runs “dread” for a short time to bring order and balance back, to gain some hand.”

To which Susan replied:

“That makes sense. Not to hit below the belt, but honestly, in that case I totally understand instilling dread, in the form of an ultimatum, let’s say. My husband once told me, when I turned down sex too many times in a row, that he was not interested in remaining married to me unless I changed my attitude. Which I did, fast. Our trust was maintained, even though the relationship had been threatened. He could have gotten me back into bed by flirting with other women, certainly, but the trust would have been broken by the threat. The way he handled it, he was saying he wanted more of me, not someone else instead. It made all the difference.”

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Deti

in that case I totally understand instilling dread, in the form of an ultimatum, let’s say. My husband once told me, when I turned down sex too many times in a row, that he was not interested in remaining married to me unless I changed my attitude. Which I did, fast. Our trust was maintained, even though the relationship had been threatened. He could have gotten me back into bed by flirting with other women, certainly, but the trust would have been broken by the threat. The way he handled it, he was saying he wanted more of me, not someone else instead. It made all the difference.”

I’m so glad you found this quote, I was going to search for it myself! Note my description of what worked. My husband spoke to me with calm reason. No games, no tricks, no manipulation. In reviewing Roissy and Rollo’s writings, it is clear that he did the opposite of what they recommend. He motivated me to change by negatively reinforcing my behavior in precisely the way I have been recommending in this thread. I may have felt a sense of dread as a result, but never at any point did he attempt to make me anxious or jealous, especially by reminding me that he had options, which is the cornerstone of instilling dread. As always, intent is key.

I may have misspoken here, but if you read the quote again, you’ll see that there was no intention on his part to make me worry that he would leave me for another woman. If he had, I would have responded by withdrawing further, not having more sex. What he did was state his love for me, commitment to our family and our marriage, and state his expectations. I never for one moment feared he might leave, because I knew what I had to do to make him happy, and was able to do that literally within a few days.

http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

HanSolo:

I actually backed into Deida from his other work. In the body of his work, the sexual typing is only the first stage of, for want of a better word, spiritual awakening. In his model for yoga is a tripod, with yoga as therapy (90 % of what’s practised in the West), yoga as a muse, and yoga as a spiritual practice being the three legs. Typing someone as masculine or feminine is mostly for therapy, because for the muse component you really have to let go of that identity.

I am sort of mulling it over as this way: A man may prefer 3x as much masculinity as femininity, but ultimately how strong a person (sexually) is determined by the absolute levels of masculinity and femininity, and not the ratio of the two. If a man actively suppresses his femininity, he either: 1.) also limits his masculinity, or 2.) becomes hypermasculine and hence unbalanced in his approach to life.

I may be mostly preaching to myself on this one, and I’m having a bit of trouble finding appropriate English words for the concepts.

Russ:

Ah, yes, the classics are all full of so-called, “Red pill wisdom.” I guess if we’re talking about stolen ideas, I have to wonder how much of European philosophy evolved from what came out of India.

deti

“Has any man here successfully convinced his indifferent wife that he was truly a catch and that other women would love to scoop him up, even if no such evidence of these other women existed?

What evidence is there that this theory has ever worked? (The R’s don’t count.)”

Even if someone did come here and relate an account, you would simply dismiss it as an anecdote, an isolated incident from which no conclusions could ever be drawn. You’ve done that with Fly Fresh and Young, who told a story here of having sex with a woman while on some errand away from her boyfriend. Your interest in the story was limited to trying to poke holes in it and detract from his credibility.

Or if you didn’t dismiss it as an aberration, I suspect you’d simply ignore it. You are convinced that Dread won’t work, cannot ever work. How can anyone ever hope to convince you otherwise?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Even if someone did come here and relate an account, you would simply dismiss it as an anecdote, an isolated incident from which no conclusions could ever be drawn

Well we don’t know, because I have never seen or heard of a single instance of the effective use of dread to improve a relationship over the long-term.

You’ve done that with Fly Fresh and Young, who told a story here of having sex with a woman while on some errand away from her boyfriend. Your interest in the story was limited to trying to poke holes in it and detract from his credibility.

My interest was in calling him out as the slacker punk of poor character that he is and dismissing him from my blog. It worked.

You are convinced that Dread won’t work, cannot ever work. How can anyone ever hope to convince you otherwise?

I believe Dread can make women jealous and anxious, as Rollo reports success with this in his dealings with Mrs. Tomassi. I do not understand the need to use it in a healthy relationship where mutual attraction is present. It strikes me as an unnecessarily cruel thing to do to someone you love. I also don’t believe it reflects a good understanding of female psychology. Roissy coined the term, and wrote the strategy. He has recently openly stated that Chateau Heartiste is geared to what he called “cad Game.” Dread is a tool for cads. Even its author would agree.

http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

Just to go along with what Mike is saying: the archetype for a HUS-endorsed husband appears to be a 25-27 year old STEM nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice Guy/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity, and safe, stable, SAMH-compatible technical job. He will actively want an LTR, will not consort with dark alpha swordsmen types, and will be unaware of his attractiveness to mate-poaching, increasingly-desperate, wall-hitting sluts facing stiff intrasexual competition for scarce resour—er, “eligible males with provisioning potential.”

The problem is that this guy may also be a bit boring to the ambitious, hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP. He doesn’t play a particularly strong hand or start from a dominant position of strength and sexiness (his value proposition—“Mr. Good Enough beta provisioner”— sounds cuddly, guileless, and adorable, like a pet rabbit).

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Bastiat Blogger

the archetype for a HUS-endorsed husband appears to be a 25-27 year old STEM nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice Guy/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity, and safe, stable, SAMH-compatible technical job.

Yikes, that would never have worked for me. My HUS endorsed husband was a 28 year old Wall St. hire with a string of ONSs and several girlfriends in his past. Introverted, yes, but smart, funny and possessing a wide range of interests. He never asked my number, is relatively more liberal about promiscuity than I am, for both sexes. He works in an industry that is anything but safe and stable. It is fairly technical in that it requires considerable understanding of complex instruments, and he’s exceptionally good at it, which has led to high status. Oh, and I almost forgot – he is a beta male.

That is what I want for my readers.

Your description actually sounds more like something a lot of the guys on here would like to believe.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

The problem is that this guy may also be a bit boring to the ambitious, hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP.

Yup, she’ll eat him for breakfast. Since she is generally not focused on LTRs, much less marriage or having a family, she is best served by her alpha male counterpart, who shares her priorities and most likely her sociosexuality. Explorers mate well with Explorers, and not well with anyone else.

Mike C

Good theory doesn’t dismiss outliers: it attempts to comprehend provide explanatory power *for them.* Good theory TRIES to fail.

Russ, I’m going to disagree with you here strongly. From a pragmatic view, who cares about explaining the outliers. Let me give you an example, and I hope Bastiat shows up to add to it.

I trade financial markets. They are highly chaotic with perhaps hundreds of input variables determining the path of various asset/security prices. Some people get really, really, really, filthy stinking rich building maps and models that capture/explain only some segment of security prices (maybe Bastiat is one of them, examples are guys like Buffett or Soros, or Tudor Jones or Steve Cohen).

No one model could fully explain everything. There may be some security that behaves in way that is not explainable. Maybe the academic might take up the challenge, but the real-world trader says “who gives a fuck”. I’ve got 20 other securities that my model predicted perfectly, and my bank account proves it.

Re the term “outlier”, someone upthread tried to assign some pejorative meaning to it which I thought was quite silly. It simply refers to a statistical property that in any sample/population you are going to have the + and -2 SD that don’t resemble the mean. The real debate is what is the outlier and what is typical. None of us knows the population. We all have our particular samples that we extrapolate. Arguably, and I am open to this, some of us may have self-selected samples. That is where the criticism comes in that you can’t extrapolate your anecdotal experience to the overall population.

Russ in Texas

@Hope#700,

Yes. So far as I’m concerned, even finding such women (or their male equivalents) attractive is DLV.

That’s not going to win me any friends by saying so…

Russ in Texas

@MikeC#703,

Great. Let’s build a better map. From what I’m seeing, my “native mode” clearly isn’t going to cut it for Deti, and his doesn’t do it for mine, either.

I despise Hegel, but in this case, synthesis may be appropriate.

Fifth Season

@Susan 3:27PM

Yes, but the Cinderella fairy tale and James Cameron’s Titanic remain such popular stories because they feature love stories where the partner in the underclass is lifted up. I’d like to see just how the attitudes will change in the future. I also mentioned Prince Harry and Kate Middleton because it’s the most well-known and recent SES “upgrade” that Anne would be familiar with.

I don’t think Anne reads this thread anymore (the posters here never seemed primarily interested in giving her further advice, only in arguing about how her exchange fits in with their own mindsets), but I’d like it if you could pass along my message. More letters in this vein could help unravel the notion that “hot women” have it the easiest of all in the SMP/MMP.

Russ in Texas

@MikeC#708,

In context, fair enough. I’m accustomed to fields where you crash-test any theory you’re working, HARD, and outliers signify “back to drawing board.”

But put into your intellectual language, could we not presuppose an alpha where instead of adjusting for risk, we are instead adjusting for social context? That seems within bounds to me.

(now, I may be misusing the term, as my background is quite different, so pls feel free to pimpslap if so)

Mike C

I think what people like Russ and Damien are saying is, if you are a mature, actualized person, why waste time on someone who needs constant correction?

Hope,

Of course, but what do you do if you are already in the situation. Of course, the answer to drug addiction is not taking drugs in the first place, or the answer to obesity is not overeating in the first place. But sometimes, you find yourself in a situation where course correction is a necessity. But yes, thinking ahead and trying to avoid those situations is better.

I think this gets even more complicated with relationships because of all the moving parts, and the injection of emotions and sexual attraction/chemistry into the picture. Say you get married to someone and later on you realize he/she has some issues that need to be “course corrected”. Do you bail or try to course correct? I think that depends on a number of things that can get quite complex and messy.

Mike C

More letters in this vein could help unravel the notion that “hot women” have it the easiest of all in the SMP/MMP.

Fifth season,

Just curious, in your opinion, who has it easier?

Russ in Texas

@Mike#713,

Absolutely.

pvw

@Ted at 683: Re. quality as mature and self controlled, that is not what all men are looking for.

Me: Wow, that is surprising; now, I don’t mean mature in terms of age, but in terms of emotional outlook. The opposite is the drama queen, it seems to me, or the woman who is so out of control that life with her is one long roller coaster. I suppose that if a man likes that kind of thing, he will want the constant dopamine rush…Or if he likes controlling a woman who gets out of control….he will want that.

Thus I agree with hope at 700:

Self-control/future-orientation/willpower/maturity don’t just translate to better relationships. They help other things like better social ties, overall health, lower rates of overweightness/obesity, more conscientious parenting, etc…. if you are a mature, actualized person, why waste time on someone who needs constant correction?

Me: I was specifically looking for that in Mr. PVW: his emotional maturity, integrity, problem-solving abilities, whether he was a grown-up responsible individual who wasn’t constantly living on a roller coaster. Since we saw that we each fit the other in that sense, things are ridiculously smooth between us. Not that there hasn’t been dramatic moments, but we deal with them and move on…..

@BB 707: The problem is that this guy may also be a bit boring to the ambitious, hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP.

Me: But he would be ideal for his female counterpart, paraphrasing your text and drawing upon the actual experiences of various HUS female commenters who are happily married/partnered: the 25-27 year old female nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice girl/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity and an interest in domesticity. She will actively want a LTR.

The question is whether he can find her in the midst of the “hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP” who take advantage of the fact that he is clueless that the “increasingly-desperate, wall-hitting sluts facing stiff intrasexual competition for scarce resour—er, “eligible males with provisioning potential.” are hunting him down…

Mike C

@MikeC#708,

In context, fair enough. I’m accustomed to fields where you crash-test any theory you’re working, HARD, and outliers signify “back to drawing board.”

Good point. If we are talking about airplane crashes as outliers then we definitely need a better model than hey this one is good enough and we can disregard the outliers. It is just so complicated with human beings. You can’t reduce a human being to a set of deterministic equations. What you can do is test, observe, and compare notes. Repeat ad infinitum and keep refining the map.

But put into your intellectual language, could we not presuppose an alpha where instead of adjusting for risk, we are instead adjusting for social context? That seems within bounds to me.

I’m not clear on your point/question here so perhaps this response is off the mark. I definitely believe being “alpha” is or can be contextual. NO. DOUBT. ABOUT. IT. To use Susan’s term of prestige, I think there are men who can be 11s on the 1 to 10 scale of prestige (Spinal Tap reference there) in a particular social environment, but yet in their minds and mindsets they may be different.

(now, I may be misusing the term, as my background is quite different, so pls feel free to pimpslap if so)

Russ in Texas

No, Mike, I agree, and it’s one of the fundamental weakness I’m seeing with a lot of stuff I read and comments I see over on Alphagame and CH – the theory doesn’t seem to adjust for make room for those sorts of adjustments, and context, as we both agree, COUNTS.

I’ll percolate and see what I can come up with.

pvw

@BB further thoughts:

The question is whether he can find her in the midst of the “hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP” who take advantage of the fact that he is clueless that the “increasingly-desperate, wall-hitting sluts facing stiff intrasexual competition for scarce resour—er, “eligible males with provisioning potential.” are hunting him down…

I’m adding: and will he appreciate his counterpart when he might very well be transfixed by the possibilities presented by the alpha female types?

I’m thinking here of the story from a few days ago of Karen v. Chloe.

INTJ

@ Lokland

Always interesting to see the tables turn.

You fucked one alpha, your no good for an LTR.
Crazy rant (from women here) about how unrealistic the man is.

You dated on crazy chick, your no good for an LTR.
…..

+1. Personally, I’d sign up for this.

A Definite Beta Guy

Effective Dark Game, maybe I have an example….not marriage-related though, and about my current SO, of course.

I had been dating my SO for only a few months. She had moved away, and about a month into that I felt I was getting side-lined, but even earlier than that, if I had brought problems up, they weren’t really being addressed.

Fuck this. I was tired of being ignored and tired of having “a conversation” where nothing changed. So I wrote a long, angry email, sent it off to her. It detailed many things I considered faults, in great detail, along with specific examples of her poor behavior and how I was sick of her shit.

From what I understand, she was a bawling wreck for days and figured I was about to break up with her (another week later, and, yeah, I came really close).

I did not communicate that I had options, nor do I think it was a matter of “lost attraction.” On the other hand, I think she figured I DID have options: one of my friends from college was recently single, we had gone out with friends a week before, and my SO was rather suspicious of this girl who was recently single, attractive, and liked to hang out with me.

From what I understand, she was a bawling wreck for days. And maybe I was being immature, but she wasn’t listening when I actually TALKED to her, so what else was I supposed to do? Maybe FIDO? I wanted to give it a chance.

She didn’t dump me.

She tried 10 times harder to impress me and keep me.

She hasn’t outright ignored anything I’ve said since, though it’s only been a year in.

Beats me if this counts as “Dread Game” or whatever. I wasn’t trying to run a game. I had a friend I wanted to hang out with, who was also an attractive girl, and I had numerous problems with my girlfriend, who wasn’t listening, so I informed her that she was fucking up and I wasn’t taking her shit anymore.

But she wanted to keep me, I suppose, and the feeling of dread provoked her to try extra hard to keep me. This was the result of me being mean to her, enough so that Blue-Pill ADBG would have NEVER done anything like this because girls are special snowflakes, etc.

Red-Pill ADBG just didn’t give a shit.

SayWhaat

Me: But he would be ideal for his female counterpart, paraphrasing your text and drawing upon the actual experiences of various HUS female commenters who are happily married/partnered: the 25-27 year old female nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice girl/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity and an interest in domesticity. She will actively want a LTR.

Are Susan and I the only extroverts at HUS?

Extroverts get no love.

/DLV

SayWhaat

Beats me if this counts as “Dread Game” or whatever. I wasn’t trying to run a game.

That’s not Dread Game.

That’s Self-Respect Game.

INTJ

@ pvw

Me: But he would be ideal for his female counterpart, paraphrasing your text and drawing upon the actual experiences of various HUS female commenters who are happily married/partnered: the 25-27 year old female nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice girl/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity and an interest in domesticity. She will actively want a LTR.

The question is whether he can find her in the midst of the “hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP” who take advantage of the fact that he is clueless that the “increasingly-desperate, wall-hitting sluts facing stiff intrasexual competition for scarce resour—er, “eligible males with provisioning potential.” are hunting him down…

There’s only one problem here. The female HUS commenters are happily married/partnered, as you pointed out. Unless he wants to mate-poach, that target demographic is relatively useless.

What one has to do is figure out what distinguishes a single female commenter on HUS like Sai from all the other female commenters who are successfully paired up. That’s the target demographic for us guys.

Emily

Well we were all single once! 😉 And there are plenty of similar girls out there. Of course, the problem is that the introverted beta females are all at home watching Jane Austen movies with their girlfriends (which is their fault, not yours.) But they exist!

SayWhaat

What one has to do is figure out what distinguishes a single female commenter on HUS like Sai from all the other female commenters who are successfully paired up. That’s the target demographic for us guys.

It’s the same demographic, INTJ.

I spent a long-ass time being single before getting a relationship. I don’t even know where it is appropriate to say where my single period begins! 😛

Point is, there are plenty of single women in all demographics. Also, maybe you should get Sai’s email address. 😉

SayWhaat

Ha, cross-posted with Em.

pvw

@INTJ:

There’s only one problem here. The female HUS commenters are happily married/partnered, as you pointed out. Unless he wants to mate-poach, that target demographic is relatively useless.

Me: Hi, I didn’t mean in the sense of mate-poaching, but that these are examples of the male type finding his match in a woman who is like him. Most of the women in this category, from what I can tell, find their male counterparts quite desirable; they made successful matches, meaning that we and our husbands/partners were once single versions of what both BB and I described.

HanSolo

@Mr. Nervous Toes

I agree that having the right more balance is important too. An ultra-“masculine” man who could never enjoy a romance movie with his wife (maybe too much alpha) will turn her on in some ways but leave her feeling empty that he doesn’t have that emotional connection that she wants. OTOH, if he’s all chick flicks and feelings and emoting then she won’t feel much attraction even though she feels comfortable with him. Probably about 3 or 4 parts masculine for 1 part feminine is a good balance for a man.

And then strengthening and refining the good aspects of one’s masculinity and femininity is important.

A Definite Beta Guy

@ SW

That’s not Dread Game.

That’s Self-Respect Game.

Thank you. That means a lot to me. I’ve heard more than once in the past that I am somehow a bad boyfriend for standing up for myself and what I want. At one point someone said “guys like you are the reason girls can’t trust guys,” or something like that. Which kind of sucks to hear, because I like to be a Nice Guy (a little bit anyways).

So thanks for saying that

Here’s the thing, I still have a tiny bit of me that doesn’t like that side, or actions like that. And like Lokland said, basic self respect is now considered “game,” because guys are taught to NOT respect themselves. Or demand things of women-folk, because that’s un-gentlemanly.

Blue Pill ADBG would say “oh no, I did something wrong” and flood her with emails and texts and maybe call her crying, I dunno.

It’s why a lot of us say that the MOST important thing for guys to do, is to remove anti-game and learn basic self-respect, NOT to learn Game, per se.

What the PUAs do is take my example and ask “hey, how did that work?” They correctly surmised that for some reason this girl liked me and that I instilled fear that the relationship was ending, therefore she tried REALLY hard to fix the relationship. They then use that dynamic for their own purposes.

If my relationship was constantly this? My SO would burn out right damn quick. PUAs aren’t interested in LTRs, they’re interested in milking a girl for all she is worth.

I can see how it can work, and how it can be abused, and I don’t see why it wouldn’t necessarily work in a LTR. If the woman values a relationship she will work harder to fix it. She may also take it as an assertion of dominance and her attraction might increase, I guess, or maybe the emotional roller coaster afterwards (make-up sex?) can provoke that reaction. Beats me.

All I know is that my relationship was improved at least somewhat by something that resembles instilling dread. On the other hand, because I am not an asshole, I am not going to use this as a preventative measure.

Also, I am an extrovert too 😛

Emily

Yeah, I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with guys standing up for themselves if a girl is being a brat (in fact, I encourage it.) But I do have a problem with preemptive “dread game” on a girl who’s being perfectly nice. IMO there’s a massive distinction between the two.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Emily

Yeah, I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with guys standing up for themselves if a girl is being a brat (in fact, I encourage it.) But I do have a problem with preemptive “dread game” on a girl who’s being perfectly nice. IMO there’s a massive distinction between the two.

There is indeed, and none of the men here can bring themselves to defend Roissy’s preemptive “dread game,” so they’re only addressing the marriage with a death rattle.

When I argue against Instilling Dread I am referring to Roissy’s Dread post. When I hear men here advocating it in marriage, I find myself wondering how it might work if my husband suddenly told me his Russian ex gave good head. Or turned off his cell phone on alternate days. Or admired the labia of another woman. I would literally think he had lost his mind.

Russ in Texas

@ADBG#721,

Yep. Self-respect game, at the risk of sounding presumptuous, exactly what I advise in the circumstances.

When you rant and bitch and scream, it’s very easy for the one who’s done wrong to say “they’re out to lunch.” By calmly laying out exactly what the issue is in a factual way, you DHV (no monkey ranting, personal restraint, fact-based argument, clear communication that shit tests and bad behavior are out of line and won’t be tolerated).

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Russ

By calmly laying out exactly what the issue is in a factual way, you DHV (no monkey ranting, personal restraint, fact-based argument, clear communication that shit tests and bad behavior are out of line and won’t be tolerated).

Exactly. And I’m not buying the notion that women do not respond well to this. This is exactly how I dealt with toddlers when they misbehaved, and they understood perfectly.

A Definite Beta Guy

The only addendum to that, Russ, was that I wasn’t calm about it. I was pissed, and I wrote that letter with damn full intention of making sure she knew it.

Russ in Texas

You stopped and wrote, rather than just flaming her up one side and down the other. Emotions are morally and socially neutral; how they’re handled demonstrates personal value.

Fifth Season

Mike C @ 4:51 PM

Well, the ones who have it easy are those who are looking for NSA sexual activity and don’t experience any pangs of attachment because that’s what the hook-up culture is catering towards. “Hot” women, as Susan has outlined, may have the pick of the (unwanted) litter but are saddled with unique wants and needs like the rest of us, and still have to sort through so many if they want to get what they’re looking for.

Marc

@595 “Good thing for Anne is that she’s just 22. Her market value will raise for the next 8 years.”
.
Lets not single out Anne for this, but any 22 yo. Twenty two is probably the peak for a woman. There are very few woman who are prettier at 22 than when they were 15-18. Most will not acknowledge this for fear of being labeled a perv and such. America has brainwashed people into buying into the “we cant talk about teenagers in a sexual way unless they are 18+.”

Russ in Texas

Very much disagree, Marc. There are significant but subtle changes in bone structure which are still occurring, and depending on how rapidly the woman is aging, quite a number of women who are absolutely nothing to look at as teens for their peers (but just happen to have good skin), will look MUCH better at 22 and then 26.

Women who are at their best from 15-18 are the CLASSIC “peaked too early” syndrome. They’re not the norm.

VD

it’s one of the fundamental weakness I’m seeing with a lot of stuff I read and comments I see over on Alphagame and CH – the theory doesn’t seem to adjust for make room for those sorts of adjustments, and context, as we both agree, COUNTS.

You’re either not paying sufficient attention or you are, as Roissy would say, sperging. The theory is quite adjustable and is specifically asserted to be contextually relative as well. Only the most focused pick-up artists have a rigid formula.

Russ in Texas

Or, as I said way upthread several HUNDRED posts ago but you probably missed b/c tl;dr from hell (DAMN threads here go long!), am relatively new to the theory. In fact, since I’ve not the *foggiest* idea what sperging is, let’s make that a definite.

Could you respond to 670 with an example in context? Deti has flat-out stated that my response 644 is hopelessly beta and will never work; his theory is contradicting my (obviously anecdotal) evidence. Would be interested in your take.

http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

In both cases, stay far away.
Pity the crazy, don’t date them.

It only gets worse with intteligent males, since they know they are intelligent, so they are pretty sure their system is good. Moreover, the more intelligent guy, the greater chance most of people he interacts with have lower IQ, hence the larger chance he become convinced he’s got it and when he meets a critique, he will going to assume that the critique is invalid because it surely was formulated by one of those idiots.

Yeah they get used so much to being right that they cannot conceive ever being wrong. I particularly think that the day you declare yourself a teacher and never wrong is the first day of your intellectual death because you cannot learn anything else if you think you already know it all.

Always, ALWAYS, have a comfortable couch. For general couch purposes.
And the guest room also works for this purposes…

Perhaps. It would be more “dread” if she also went on more GNO and/or put herself in places where she is likely to meet and interact with other attractive men.
I’m quite familiar with female dread game usually applied by Dominican ladies when their husbands start to show the “signs” of an affair. I know a couple that dress to the nines, go out in a night they usually don’t without telling the hubby where they are going on advance or just a passing “going to a party with some friends…” and just staying a few hours in a park bench, drinking some soda… I don’t criticize it if you are in an emergency and trying to save a marriage but is indeed pathetic regardless the gender.

The problem is that this guy may also be a bit boring to the ambitious, hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP.

I never understood the obsession with finding an entertaining partner, the few times I had been bored I found many things to do to entertain myself, never though it was anyone’s job but mine to keep me entertained.Maybe the new wedding vows should add for exciting and boring times…

From a pragmatic view, who cares about explaining the outliers.
Tell that to the dozens publishing houses that rejected Harry Potter…
I know you cannot make a living out of hoping to hit the jackpot, but isn’t dating essentially weeding out the handful of outliers that might be a right match? I mean if we could just have a successful relationship with anyone people will probably be randomly matched by a mathematical system, not even arranged marriages assume all people will match they do filter in some other ways. My point being outliers are not to be ignored in many aspects, YMMV.

Sperging (showing Asperger traits) is being rendered obsolete by the DSM-V due to the rolling of the term into general autism.

So you don’t need to worry about the term because it’s being psychologized out of existence.

And yes, this blog is very commenty.

Anne

@ Fifth Season,
I read some, but it’s mostly just PUA conversation now.
I know some people saying they are ‘allergic’ to debate about social class and whether it matters (or whether they even exist).
Most women I know value confidence, social status, wealth, ambition, success etc. very high. I cared about looks a lot when I was a teenager, now much less. I know some girls who talk a lot about biceps and abs all that very often, but I don’t think they’re being honest with themselves about preferences, because their actions speak otherwise.
Confidence is the most important attribute to attract women, and men who are born into well-off families have a confidence other men don’t. My impression is that things can go into a positive or negative circle from a young age. A lot of men link their self-esteem and self-worth to their ability to get women, if they do well early – they continue to do well.
Undoubtedly some young guys are so full of themselves it makes them impossible to deal with. But most have certain demands from their families and if they will be in charge of a business some day, they can’t be messing around.
As Susan said, family expectations is one part of it. My sister brought home a bartender and my mother had sleepless nights. They eventually broke up, as much as my sister insisted she “could do as she pleases”.
I don’t feel the pressure for a guy to cross an “income level”, but my mother has been clear on me not letting a guy move into my apartment and live there for free and if we were to get a place together, he should bring 50% at least.
It is not as if you have candidates lined up with their incomes listed. I didn’t know Stephen’s “situation” when I first agreed to the dinner date. There is a certain gap between us (firstly because he’s already working), but not so much that it worries me. Of course his parents are wealthier than mine (albeit in a billionaire vs millionaire sort of way). His brother is in an LTR, her background is similar to mine.
Realistically speaking, I would look for a guy from upper middle class or above (but I find that too ‘vague’, since social class is defined differently in different countries).
Of course there are great guys of all backgrounds. I don’t think of this mindset as ‘exclusion’ though. Firstly, a girl’s options are geographically limited – my school, gym, local bars and restaurants. I don’t approach or initiate contact with men, so the selection of those men again is limited to those who approach me. I would have to either start approaching men (not happening) or change my social circle (why?) for the socio-economic group of men I date to change.
I can add that my impression has always been that men aren’t really looking to ‘date up’ in terms of wealth. I think it often makes them uncomfortable.

JP

“Confidence is the most important attribute to attract women, and men who are born into well-off families have a confidence other men don’t.”

That’s because not being well off is kind of demeaning.

You know that you really don’t matter, economically speaking, so you feel inferior.

A Definite Beta Guy

Bah, this “confidence” spiel again…

Yeah, confidence is important, as in, if you don’t have it, you’re screwed, but Anne, that isn’t enough by far.

My co-workers argue with the federal government and insurance companies all day long. That can get intense. They enjoy physical sports and tackle football without pads and are fiercely competitive. If you challenge them to a fight, they will obliterate you without a second thought. They do not give a single fuck about workplace rules: they cuss up a storm, they drink up lunch, and “hostile work environment” means nothing to them.

On my job interview, I told my job interviewer that she was wrong, to her face, still got the job.

Confidence is not what separates me from them.

What separates me from them is that I have Roissy, and they have Feminism.

JP

“My co-workers argue with the federal government and insurance companies all day long. That can get intense. They enjoy physical sports and tackle football without pads and are fiercely competitive. If you challenge them to a fight, they will obliterate you without a second thought. They do not give a single fuck about workplace rules: they cuss up a storm, they drink up lunch, and “hostile work environment” means nothing to them.”

They sound profoundly subhuman.

A Definite Beta Guy

Yeah, male intrasexual dynamics can look that way from the outside, but, tbh, I prefer it to some sewing circle nonsense where we all talk about our feelings and sip tea 😛

Russ in Texas

Regarding Anne#742’s comment.

This is correct. My wife and I both come from ruined family (mine from squandering and wastage, hers from the Communists); social standing counts. We can socialize with anyone, but we can no longer pay the price of entry required to circulate in the same circles (and, of course, each of us had to scrape for an education our great-grandparents took for granted).

The problem with marrying up, as a man, is that so often the families of the ladies in question will make it impossible unless the gal is willing to abandon her family, which is a heavy price. That situation was in play with me once in college, with a lovely french girl from a good family, and because abandoning her family was a non-starter and I wasn’t an acceptable match, that was that.

Worked out better eventually; I prefer Hungarian cooking. But anyone who says SES doesn’t matter is involved in self-delusion.

INTJ

@ Emily, SayWhaat, pvw

Well my point is that the young female commenters on HUS have a much lower probability of being single than the young male commenters. This is reflective of the general trend in society too. Sure, the introverted female nerdlings might find their male counterparts attractive. But there are far too few female nerdlings to go around for all the male nerdlings.

@ Emily

Of course, the problem is that the introverted beta females are all at home watching Jane Austen movies with their girlfriends (which is their fault, not yours.) But they exist!

Ahh well it’s not like the introverted beta males are any better. 😀

@ SayWhaat

Also, maybe you should get Sai’s email address. 😉

Yeah considered that but AFAIK, she’s several thousand kilometers away.

@ Sai

Sorry for talking about you in the third person. 😀

J

@Deti

I probably lead the pack of your detractors, and I don’t find you diabolical. A bit curmudgeonly perhaps but not diabolical. 😉

I do find your situation sad and your marriage, at least as you describe it, untenable. FWIW, I think you and the wife need to forgive each other and move on–or just split up. I personally would hate to be stuck in the relationship you describe. It’s got to be very hard on both of you.

@Hope re women instilling dread

I find the notion of instilling dread as a relationship strategy to be sort of pathetic, but I will say that when both parties have real options outside the marriage, it does increase their appreciation for each other. I don’t think that can be faked though.

@Marc

There are very few woman who are prettier at 22 than when they were 15-18. Most will not acknowledge this for fear of being labeled a perv and such. America has brainwashed people into buying into the “we cant talk about teenagers in a sexual way unless they are 18+.”

No, there is actually a large cadre of men who prefer to be with a full grown woman. To most men, 15 is cute and coltish; 18-27 is young enough to be maximally attractive but also fully grown and fertile.

As a point of fact, pregnancy outcomes for 15 year olds are comparable to outcomes for 35 year olds. A women needs hips to give birth.

J

I can add that my impression has always been that men aren’t really looking to ‘date up’ in terms of wealth. I think it often makes them uncomfortable.

It does make them uncomfortable; it interferes with the natural male role of provider and also intimidates those men who who see financial dependency as a force that holds relationshops together. IME, the usual hypergamous trade-off is her looks for his money. A rich man can usually get a better looking woman than his poor twin can.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

Say: “I spent a long-ass time being single before getting a relationship. I don’t even know where it is appropriate to say where my single period begins! ”

Funny how, by this criteria, the women count, but the men don’t.

J

Someone: Women are attracted to behaviors that signify status/dominance in men.

SW: Women are attracted to men who signal “good genes.” Looks are very important to women. They look for symmetry, strength, and signs of a strong immune system. If you don’t accept that, you’re kidding yourself.

Me: Yep. I’d agree that the first thing women notice are the good gene markers, followed by prestige, the social dominance.

J

The only thing you left out is that when a woman demonstrates that she does in fact work differently, she is branded an “outlier.” It sounds like some dystopian designation for the hinterlands. An outcast, a weirdo. Or else she’s treated as the Blessed Madonna of Mating, the one woman ever born without the sin of hypergamy.

LMAO. You should do a post where we play a game in which each female commenter emails you to say if she views herself as normal, an outlier or a madonna. She also guesses how the guys will see her. Then the guys rate each woman. You could give out HUS t-shirts as prizes to the women who guess the male view of her the most accurately.

Mike C

Confidence is the most important attribute to attract women, and men who are born into well-off families have a confidence other men don’t. My impression is that things can go into a positive or negative circle from a young age. A lot of men link their self-esteem and self-worth to their ability to get women, if they do well early – they continue to do well.

Anne,

I’m hoping I can get you to flesh this out some more. As an extremely hot young woman (per Susan’s evaluation) I think it would be instructive to hear *exactly* how you go about evaluating a man’s confidence. The more specific you can be here the better. What exactly are you observing and assessing to make the determination a man is confident versus lacks confidence.

I’ll say you are very correct about your last few sentences. There is a virtuous circle and/or negative feedback cycle depending on which train a guy gets on at a young age. And I think for most men….probably close to all actually, self-esteem is tied to the ability to “get girls”.

First of all, I will once again note that the goal posts have been moved. Rollo and Roissy both advocate for the instillation of dread ****as a preventative practice to be instituted and perpetrated from the start.****

Well, that isn’t my position so I would agree with you that “instilling dread” as a preventative practice in an otherwise healthy relationship is wrong and counterproductive. From that perspective, I’d note that one component of healthy is one where the woman fully appreciates and is highly attracted to the man who has chosen and committed to her. Instilling dread only becomes necessary if she gets complacent.

To my recollection, Rollo’s position wasn’t as you describe so I went back and read his post which I am going to link to since you brought it up:

Lets be clear, the vast majority of women are secure enough not to allow this condition to get the better of them, and it’s in the extreme cases I’ve used above that real neuroticism flourishes. Contrary to popular belief I’m not an advocate of the Dark Triad methodologies of Game. Not because I think they’re ineffective, but rather because, with the right art of Game they’re not even needed.**** Only in extreme cases are the dark arts to be employed****, and if a situation necessitates their use it’s important for a guy to understand that a line has been crossed with a woman who necessitated their use.

So yes, you should be seeking to reassure an LTR of your love and devotion,

I don’t know any other way to read that and come up with your characterization. You are probably correct about Roissy, but I don’t read him literally and actually I don’t read his blog much anymore.

Because it kills the bad cells, right? So what is the source of the sickness when a woman loses attraction for her husband? The treatment cannot succeed unless it gets rid of the problem at its root. Has he let himself go? Is he uncommunicative? Does he work all the time and leave her on her own? Is he not an involved father? Has the sex become rote? Does he lack ambition? Is his career faltering due to his own lack of performance? Is he moody? Whatever the cause for her disinterest, that is what must be addressed. There is a reason she stopped wanting him. Fixing that is the only thing that might work, if it is not already too late.

I agree with some of this. Many guys would benefit from running basically Athol’s MAP. It isn’t the only thing though. In my view, the main place you are going wrong is in underestimating the complacency some women in LTRs/marriages might drift into, and it is only by a shock to the system of losing to other options that is the catalyst for course correction from bad behavior to good behavior. I’d actually agree with J that in many cases, staying in the relationship doesn’t make sense even if it is marriage, and might as well cut your losses and move on. Screw playing games and instead of displaying options, simply end it, and go exercise them. This gets trickier possibly if there are dependent children involved and lots of financial entanglements. In the current legal system, many wives have their husbands “over the barrel” so to speak in terms of divorcing them so whether to leave or play the games of brinksmanship to “course correct” the relationship is a difficult choice.

How would you go about instilling dread if your fiance confessed she no longer found you attractive and no longer wanted to have sex?

I’m assuming you are asking me directly so I’ll answer. The first thing I would do is elevate to a top priority getting my bodyfat back down to 12-15%. After that, I’d switch gears to being more flirtatious and I’d also be more responsive and engaging to IOIs which is a mode that I’ve basically completely turned off. I have limited interaction these days with other women especially while in the presence of my fiancee. To the extent I do, I’m polite and matter of fact, never flirtatious. There is one girl we encounter regularly who I am pretty sure likes me, but I don’t give her anything to run with. Under your hypothetical, I’d start playing that interaction differently.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Mike C

I recall a different Rollo post, where he specifically discusses his effective use of Dread in keeping Mrs. Tomassi on her toes. He describes flirting with other women in her presence, and offers his opinion that it is both useful and powerful to directly cause anxiety and jealousy in one’s partner. I asked him specifically about that description earlier in the thread, but he did not reply. Perhaps he has taken it down.

You are probably correct about Roissy, but I don’t read him literally and actually I don’t read his blog much anymore.

There are two ways to guarantee a healthy relationship. Meet your soulmate. Instill dread.

Women respond viscerally in their vagina area to unpredictability, mixed signals, danger, and drama in spite of their best efforts to convince themselves otherwise. Managing your relationship in such a way that she is left with a constant, gnawing feeling of impending doom will do more for your cause than all the Valentine’s Day cards and expertly performed tongue love in the world. Like it or not, the threat of a looming breakup, whether the facts justify it or not, will spin her into a paranoid estrogen-fueled tizzy, and she’ll spend every waking second thinking about you, thinking about the relationship, thinking about how to fix it. Her love for you will blossom under these conditions. Result: she works harder to please you.

The key for the man is to adopt a posture of blase emotional distance alternated with loving tenderness.

This is the post I have always argued against. It is the post that inspired Rollo, presumably. Roissy invented Dread Game, he defined it. It bears no resemblance to the practice of not putting up with poor treatment or making your expectations clear when a relationship is in trouble.

I have no interest in debating Dread Lite. The debate is about Roissy’s codified method for guaranteeing a “healthy relationship.”

it is only by a shock to the system of losing to other options that is the catalyst for course correction from bad behavior to good behavior.

But few men in LTRs actually have options – hell, most men didn’t have options when they were single, right? Only alphas have options? How is the beta who has lost his wife’s attraction supposed to come up with these options?

I’m assuming you are asking me directly so I’ll answer. The first thing I would do is elevate to a top priority getting my bodyfat back down to 12-15%.

You’ve just admitted that you would actually need to become more attractive to run Dread. If you became more attractive, you would likely solve the problem. Even now, you state that you are getting IOIs from one woman the two of you see regularly. Surely your fiancee is aware of her attraction to you? IOW, you have one option, and she’d be a fool to be oblivious to that woman’s attraction. That real option, rather than some kind of “pretend” option, is part of what keeps your fiance attracted to you.

It’s a question of preselection, which is why I’m surprised the men here are not getting it. You can’t fake preselection. Even PUAs have to find some decent women to parade around with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

INTJ: “There’s always Megaman to white-knight when needed. ”

I think BB and Han are on the +1 list, Mega just says what they wanna hear (even if it is mostly true, things ain’t so bad; we just disagree on tactics).

I enjoy my position here as the well-reviled man who went off-reservation. Am I good or evil? It’s fun to watch the wheels spin and the gaskets blow…

Mike C

I do not understand the need to use it in a healthy relationship where mutual attraction is present. It strikes me as an unnecessarily cruel thing to do to someone you love.

Yeah, we have to definitely purge the earth of such men. An N of below average and strict idealism for LTRs is a definite dealbreaker! Sleep around, guys, your respect hinges on it.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

Yeah, we have to definitely purge the earth of such men. An N of below average and strict idealism for LTRs is a definite dealbreaker! Sleep around, guys, your respect hinges on it.

I was simply pointing out that it would be hypocritical for me to make such an endorsement since I made a very different choice myself, and in fact, would never have been found acceptable by the man BB describes.

This is not some conservative Christian blog. I’ll happily endorse any man who is capable of long-term commitment without cheating.

Ha, the newest post is dedicated to Megaman, who has done more research to back up his claims that the lot of you put together. He does not suffer from confirmation bias, or have an agenda of any kind. In fact, it was his thoughtful prodding that got me to take a new look at the state of relationships on college campuses. And I have reversed my previous beliefs as a result.

Mike C

Yeah, we have to definitely purge the earth of such men. An N of below average and strict idealism for LTRs is a definite dealbreaker! Sleep around, guys, your respect hinges on it.

LOL…got to love the mixed messages. What it boils down to, if you are handsome nice guy beta who happens to luck into casual sex from sexually aggressive women, you can retain you “good guy” card. But if you are a guy who does even one iota of planning, systematizing, tactical analysis to get casual sex than you are a “bad man”.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

But if you are a guy who does even one iota of planning, systematizing, tactical analysis to get casual sex than you are a “bad man”.

If you can do it without deceit of any kind, that’s OK. Most men who scheme to get casual sex use deceit as a primary tool.

Damien Vulaume

@Susan:
-Chemotherapy makes you sick, but it gets rid of the cancer.

“Because it kills the bad cells, right? So what is the source of the sickness when a woman loses attraction for her husband? The treatment cannot succeed unless it gets rid of the problem at its root. (…) if it is not already too late. ”
THIS is excactly the core of the problem with the, how should I call them, the manosphere supporters. It is based on their biased view and lack of knowledge of women, and their lack of discerning judgement between different kind of women, largely based on one negative experience with one particular woman.

@Mike C
“probably close to all actually, self-esteem is tied to the ability to “get girls”.

To some extent yes, but I wouldn’t reduce male self esteem to just this, which is only the vain side to any man’s self esteem. But yes, let’s not kid ourselves, we all have it, just like women have their own vain side, which translates differently (see the chapter on stringing along, friend zoning, etc).

And to close that dreadful discussion about dread or no dread. Applying dread games to your woman IS a form of imposing your will by force (this also what I meant with the wrong piece of the puzzle being “forced” in) ending in having someone put into submission and at your mercy. This not only humanely wrong, but also dangerous.
We all have a sadistic trait deep somewhere, and nothing brings it out better than knowing you have someone at your mercy…. I prefer to keep mine in check.

J

You all will never guess what I’m watching on TV right now. ELP!

I didn’t read the book or see it in the theater. As suspected it would be, it’s a huge pantload of self-indulgent BS, but I’m enjoying watching Julia Roberts eat Italian food and wear saris. Right now , I wish I had a meatball sandwich and a salwar kameez. And an elephant because she’s petting an elephant.

I also caught the last half hour of that Fireproof movie that people are always on about. I can’t believe what a simplistic view of marriage is espoused in that movie.

Now, Julie is in Bali listening to some craziness about smiling in her liver. The scenery is pretty as is Javier Bardem, who just literally ran into her. Talk about “meeting cute”! This is turning into a rom com. I hate rom coms.

Mike C

To some extent yes, but I wouldn’t reduce male self esteem to just this, which is only the vain side to any man’s self esteem. But yes, let’s not kid ourselves, we all have it, just like women have their own vain side, which translates differently (see the chapter on stringing along, friend zoning, etc).

Right….I didn’t mean to suggest that 100% of male self-esteem is tied to being successful with women. More broadly speaking, I’d say male self-esteem is very connected to what I would call skillful competence at producing successful outcomes or high achievement. Now that could manifest itself in any number of different ways. For some guys, maybe it means being a great Halo player, for other guys being one of the strongest guys in the gym, etc. Just about every guy has something that his self-esteem is tied to in terms of being skilled at something. The guy who has nothing in that regard is dangerous because he has nothing to live for. But in any case, being successful with “getting girls” is part of the equation. It is why guys will pay $5,000 to presumably learn how to be successful at “getting girls” while no such comparable market opportunity exists for women to “get guys”.

Mike C

But few men in LTRs actually have options – hell, most men didn’t have options when they were single, right? Only alphas have options? How is the beta who has lost his wife’s attraction supposed to come up with these options?

I’m not an expert on Athol’s system but I do believe the lynchpin/starting point is actually boosting your attractiveness. I agree with you that creating real options out of thin air is ridiculous.

If you became more attractive, you would likely solve the problem. Even now, you state that you are getting IOIs from one woman the two of you see regularly. Surely your fiancee is aware of her attraction to you?

Honestly don’t know. Although generally speaking, I do believe women are much more “in tune” with sort of the dynamics that go unsaid, I think it is possible to be oblivious to things if you aren’t looking for them especially if the other person’s display is somewhat understated. With a woman, there is that fine line where she is just being friendly to where she is perhaps being overly friendly because she likes you. Not always easy to call that one perfectly.

Emily

INTJ (748),

I think part of the issue is that the female nerdlings and the male nerdlings often have separate interests and social circles. I was recently at an anime convention and I couldn’t help but notice that there were way more girls than guys. I remember thinking that they should merge the event with Comic Con. :p. IMO, it’s more a logistical issue than anything.

I will once again note that the goal posts have been moved. Rollo and Roissy both advocate for the instillation of dread as a preventative practice to be instituted and perpetrated from the start. This is what I have strenuously objected to all along. It has not been promoted by them as something as a last ditch effort to save a failing relationship, or to save a marriage to keep a family together, as Vox mentioned.

No, the goal posts haven’t been moved at all. You’ve claimed the tactic does not work and cannot be a part of a healthy relationship. Rollo, Roissy, and I all disagree; the distinction between what you’re saying Rollo and Roissy have said and what I’ve said is merely the timing of the application. You’ve confused intent and effect as well as functionality and application. You’ve also cited your father as a primary example of the inefficacy of Dread then claimed that he never used it. And you’ve drawn a quixotic distinction between Dread that is based on real threats and Dread that is based on imaginary ones.

I don’t know if this is striking too close to home or what, Susan, but this is not your usual calm and collected analysis.

He is wrong, he just hasn’t admitted (or perhaps understood) it yet. The fact that Vox admits he’s never had to use dread proves my point. If a man has high SMV in his wife’s eyes, dread is unnecessary. If he doesn’t, she can’t feel dread.

No, he certainly hasn’t understood that. But my not using it proves nothing; I don’t use negs or numerous other Game tactics either. If a man is perceived to have sufficiently high SMV, Dread is unnecessary… at the moment. Rollo and Roissy are simply advocating the use of it as a preventative measure. Furthermore, you’re failing to understand that Dread is a means of elevating one’s SMV in the woman’s eyes; it’s basically an ex post facto version of pre-selection. Would you find it less objectionable if it was termed post-selection?

He describes flirting with other women in her presence, and offers his opinion that it is both useful and powerful to directly cause anxiety and jealousy in one’s partner.

Are those women invented? In light of your earlier comments, how can this be Dread if the threat is real and not invented. More importantly, how is this any different than the behavior of your father, who you informed us never used Dread?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@VD

You’ve claimed the tactic does not work and cannot be a part of a healthy relationship. Rollo, Roissy, and I all disagree; the distinction between what you’re saying Rollo and Roissy have said and what I’ve said is merely the timing of the application

But timing is important – Roissy advocates dread from the get go.

the threat of a looming breakup, whether the facts justify it or not, will spin her into a paranoid estrogen-fueled tizzy

If you can’t see anything wrong with that from a moral POV, there’s no point in discussing it further.

You’ve also cited your father as a primary example of the inefficacy of Dread then claimed that he never used it.

You are still misunderstanding. My father was a natural and did have a lot of options, but he did not deliberately employ a strategy of making my mother aware of those options. He didn’t need to. That is the difference. It is significant that as the wife of a man who had options and was responsive to other women, his behavior did not create a desire on the of my mother to keep her man happy, it created enormous anger and resentment, and she frequently froze him out. His SMV, had he not been an attention seeker, would have made her feel that she had won the prize. Instead she was humiliated on a regular basis. So, to summarize, he did not have an intention to create a paranoid tizzy in my mother or threaten a looming breakup. He just enjoyed the attention of women. What his behavior did produce was anger rather than dread.

And you’ve drawn a quixotic distinction between Dread that is based on real threats and Dread that is based on imaginary ones.

The whole point of Roissy’s post is to create imaginary threats. It’s all duplicity. There’s not a single recommendation in his post about the male’s real SMV or desirability. The idea is to make the female imagine a threat.

As an aside, I do not find it credible that many men whose wives no longer find them attractive have any options whatsoever.

Are those women invented? In light of your earlier comments, how can this be Dread if the threat is real and not invented.

The difference is that in Rollo’s scenario, the male actively seeks and cultivates flirtatious relationships for the express purpose of causing his wife anxiety and jealousy. That would be thoughtless and devoid of empathy even if the male did initiate the flirtation, as with my father. It is sadistic and selfish to purposely create that dynamic for the express purpose of inducing paranoia.

VD

Yeah they get used so much to being right that they cannot conceive ever being wrong. I particularly think that the day you declare yourself a teacher and never wrong is the first day of your intellectual death because you cannot learn anything else if you think you already know it all.

I see this behavior most often in academics and those whose lives are structured in such a way that they experience no consequences for being wrong. It’s pretty much impossible to have that attitude in finance or economics; it’s only a matter of time before you’re wrong and there will definitely be consequences.

never though it was anyone’s job but mine to keep me entertained.

You are wise beyond your years. It isn’t. But many women don’t understand that.

Always, ALWAYS, have a comfortable couch. For general couch purposes.

Temporarily pulling away from the situation for effect, whether it is going and sleeping on the couch or sleeping in the guest bedroom is a BETA move. I have a friend or two who does this from time to time and he is absolutely of lower SS rank. Basically, it’s a feminine, passive-aggressive response. “I am going to deprive you of my wonderful presence until you are nice to me.”

By way of contrast, compare that action with the High Alpha move of kicking a girl out of her own bed, in her apartment, just so one can sleep more comfortably on an initial overnight visit. That is supreme confidence and the tightest of Indifference Game.

What would your idea of those two men be if you saw a) a man come out of his own apartment with blankets and a pillow, asking if he could sleep on your couch because his wife was being mean, versus b) a woman come out of her own apartment, asking if she could sleep on your couch because she’d been kicked out of her own bed by some guy she’d picked up? Who is the Alpha, (a) or (b)?

It would only be Dread Game if you called a woman, then left the house and spent the night away from it. Or, I suppose, if you slept in the guest bedroom after inviting a woman over and having her spend the night in there with you.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

By way of contrast, compare that action with the High Alpha move of kicking a girl out of her own bed, in her apartment, just so one can sleep more comfortably on an initial overnight visit. That is supreme confidence and the tightest of Indifference Game.

I hope you are joking. Does she sleep on the floor next to the bed? Will you let her come up to the mattress for sex in the morning?

Any woman who didn’t throw your ass out on the spot is pathetic. I don’t deny there are some pathetic women.

OlioOx

My impression is that things can go into a positive or negative circle from a young age. A lot of men link their self-esteem and self-worth to their ability to get women, if they do well early – they continue to do well.

A similar sentiment from an old dead white male:

“There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.”

(For you landlubbers, he’s talking about high tide and low tide; the ‘flood’ is high tide.)

Damien Vulaume

“… what about the countless self-help books out there? (The Rules, He’s Just Not that Into You etc etc.). Lots of the advice is terrible, but they’re all about how to ‘get guys’.”
True, as well as those countless girl’s/women’s magazine which, besides promoting fashion names, do mostly just that.

Benton

I’m sorry, but I have no sympathy for complaints from someone who won the genetic lottery. They have so many advantages compared to everyone else. I’m speaking from experience here- beautiful women will always get favorable treatment and will always receive attention from the more desirable guys. Sure, they have challenges too (no one’s life is perfect), but it is so much easier for them than for others.
If a beautiful woman has even half of their act together, they will have a far better life than an average looking woman who has it 90% better. And don’t get me started on the women who have great personalities, but were born with physical characteristics that will always hold them back.
As a guy, I know how I can get caught up in someone’s beauty. Sometimes I wish I could be like the main character in “Shallow Hal,” where I only saw the good in people and not their physical characteristics. But it’s not that easy.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Benton

I’m sorry, but I have no sympathy for complaints from someone who won the genetic lottery.

I don’t believe your sympathy was requested. The post merely describes a real dynamic in the SMP and attempts to explore that dynamic. I am interested in the way people mate. Believe it or not, that even includes the beautiful people.

@Benton:
“I’m sorry, but I have no sympathy for complaints from someone who won the genetic lottery. They have so many advantages compared to everyone else. I’m speaking from experience here- beautiful women will always get favorable treatment and will always receive attention from the more desirable guys”

I also totally agree with that, and didn’t want to put that up for the sake of discussion, hence my more than moderate empathy for mademoiselle good looks Anne from a likely Paris-seizième or Neuilly background whose dramatic problems are now temporarily limited to break ups in seemingly superficial relationships caused by text messages or fb deleted items tricks.
I do not want to sound too harsh but, sometimes those kind of “sissy” problems are a bit exasperating given the current economical situation.
Anyway, it is nonetheless true that “too obviously” good looking girls have much more of a hard work to do in filtering in a discerning way through the fog of all those male propositions.

http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

Susan, my composite character was based on various recommendations that have been put forth at HUS over the past several months—STEM, Beta, avoiding high N males, finding guys who were disgusted by hook-up culture, etc.

I have a suspicion that you are a closet Explorer and that this occasionally leaks out into posts. You have your own appetites, but you also realize that a Mr. HUS Wall Street/Wharton/structured financial products guy is typically—in this SMP—going to be a wild, uncontrollable STR beast where most women are concerned, and so you don’t generally recommend that template to today’s college girls.

I have frequently thought that you should have both a public HUS with safe and conservative recommendations, and a more private sanctum sanctorum version—safe from the hypervigilant, greedy eyes and keyboard-poised hands of male readers like myself—where elite alpha girls can discuss topics that would be considered too risky and controversial for open dissemination. Perhaps your focus groups serve this purpose…?

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Bastiat Blogger

Susan, my composite character was based on various recommendations that have been put forth at HUS over the past several months—STEM, Beta, avoiding high N males, finding guys who were disgusted by hook-up culture, etc.

I’ll cop to directly recommending beta guys as relationship partners. I didn’t pull that out of a hat. There is ample evidence that hypermasculine/high T males cheat more and divorce more. I have suggested that women should avoid very high N males, and I have defined the limit (admittedly somewhat arbitrarily) at around 40. I do believe that men who have a very high number of partners are men who spend considerable time and energy chasing tail, which I do not consider a noble life purpose. I also believe their demonstrated preference for sexual variety implies poor suitability for monogamy.

I cannot recall promoting STEM males, nerdy males, virgin males, etc. Not only did I not suggest finding guys who are disgusted by hookup culture, I incurred the wrath of several male commenters here last week when I stated that I would be wary of a man who was “extremely disgusted by casual sex.” I have also stated that I have no regrets about the casual sex I have had, nor do I resent the casual sex my husband had before we were married.

I have a suspicion that you are a closet Explorer and that this occasionally leaks out into posts.

I definitely have a lot of Explorer in me! I don’t think I’m really in the closet – I generally laugh off all of the ‘spherians’ branding of me as a slut who married a beta provider. I’ve also defended what I perceive as harmless fun in the Bridesmaid/Groomsman fling, for example. I don’t think my SOI score would make any sense after being married for so long, but I suspect that in my youth I would have been in the middle, at least. I’ve stated this on the blog as well.

It is interesting though – I have been able to maintain a thriving monogamous relationship with mutual sustained attraction for a very long time, so there must be a bit of another Fisherian type in there as well.

you also realize that a Mr. HUS Wall Street/Wharton/structured financial products guy is typically—in this SMP—going to be a wild, uncontrollable STR beast where most women are concerned, and so you don’t generally recommend that template to today’s college girls.

I’m a big fan of catching these guys in their late 20s and up. My posts and comments about dating older tie into this. I think that a lot of these “STR beasts” will in fact want to be husbands and fathers, but not yet. (St. Augustine). As long as they didn’t go full blown PUA or get jaded and cynical about women, they’re potentially high value mates. What’s changed since my youth is that women today must filter much more aggressively. You think that equity trader is cute? Go for it, but be ready to kick him to the curb after the first douche move.

elite alpha girls can discuss topics that would be considered too risky and controversial for open dissemination. Perhaps your focus groups serve this purpose…?

They do indeed, but that is only a couple of dozen women. When I do share real tidbits from those sessions, the guys have fits. A woman whose count is 40! Someone said “boyfriends are ugly!” The Atlantic quoted one as referring to a dick the size of her pinky. Stupid, selfish sluts!

In private, I have answered a vast array of questions in a manner that might surprise you. One of my focus groups alums works for Creative Artists Agency in LA and was recently asked out by a bonafide movie star. She was beside herself and asked me what she should do. My advice was “Go for it, but realize that you are visiting a foreign land. You will not live there. Make the most of your holiday.” Now, I know that such advice is likely to send Escoffier into paroxysms of indignation. And sometimes I really would just rather not get into it on the threads – it’s draining and ridiculously time consuming. In fact, I’m an idiot for writing this on Dec. 22. I think I’ll disappear shortly.

deti

Susan:

VD is right. You’re not evaluating the Dread issue with objectivity or, candidly, with credibility.

Please understand: My interest in this issue is purely academic. I know how things go when heated discussions, this blog and Christmas all converge. So I’m going to leave this here and wish all of you a very merry Christmas.

I’m pressing on this because VD has hit on something here: Dread aims for a specific result or effect. This is what the male is interested in: undertaking certain conduct to achieve a desired result. Susan, you on the other hand appear to be far more interested in the INTENT or the MENTAL STATE, the “mens rea” if you will, WHICH MOTIVATES the behavior and not so much what results from it. This is where you’re getting bogged down, I think, because the intent really doesn’t matter as long as the outcome is reached.

Game, and male sexual behavior, seeks desired results. The intent is much less relevant to us.

susan, you did use your dad as an example of Dread.

From “The Sad Reality of Using Anxiety to Generate Attraction”, March 15, 2012, Hooking Up Smart:

“Apparently our man is lining up alternatives, “just in case.” We know he’s desirable, other women lighting up when he’s around tells us that. What we wish we didn’t know is that he’s milking it, wants more of it, is getting off on it. It’s deeply humiliating and painful for a woman in love.

“A man who does this is displaying low relationship fitness, in one of two ways:
1.He is genuinely interested in generating sexual attraction with other women, even while professing to love you.
2.He is using this behavior as a ploy to keep you on your toes.

“If he’s employing the first strategy, he’s a cad. Enough said.

“If he’s employing the second strategy, he is operating from a mindset of lack, or scarcity. This is ironic, since he is attempting to secure your sexual attraction by conveying abundance. However, he is waging the battle to secure the Position of Least Interest, which means that his win is your loss. There must always be a winner and a loser. That is a very poor paradigm for a successful relationship.

“How do I know this? Because I watched this dynamic with my own parents. My father is a highly charismatic and witty man. He is a great storyteller. The first full sentence I ever uttered, as I fished an olive out of his martini, was to tell my mother to go wash his shirts and leave us alone. My entire life I have watched people drawn to my father like moths to a flame.

“Women always flirted with my father, and he always flirted back. I recall the late 60s, lying awake while waiting for my parents to return from a party, then the muffled sound of my mother’s weeping as they returned and she spoke of the humiliation of watching this spectacle. Once I peered out of my bedroom to watch the grownups in our living room, and saw my father being dragged into the middle of the room to dance with a neighbor, who threw her arms around his neck. He was enjoying himself. At 10, I knew how my mother would feel about it, and it made me feel sick.

“I was perpetually afraid of learning that my parents were divorcing. It was clear to me, even as a child, that my father would not stop, even though it hurt my mother. His own mother had left when he was three, so perhaps that explained his insensitivity and need for female validation. Once my best friend told me how much she loved my dad, how everyone loved my dad, but that she was glad he wasn’t her dad. How I longed for a boring and staid father when I was a child!”

And yet you’ve said on this thread, at 579;

“This is a misinterpretation of what I have shared here. I am actually very close to my father and see him as high value. I believe he was desperately unhappy with a bipolar wife, which is understandable. However, he never used the tactic of instilling dread. He is extremely charismatic, even now, and has always received a lot of attention from women. My mother was pissed because he enjoyed it, but the attention was a DHV. His soliciting it would have been a DLV.

Why would a man of high value ever need to instill dread?”

I don’t see how these two statements are reconcilable. In the first quote you talked of Roissy-style Dread and then related your dad’s conduct as an example of the very thing you objected to. Why? Because of its EFFECT, on both your mother and on you. Then in the second quote you say that it wasn’t really Dread because he was high value. Well, yes it was, because of its EFFECT. It made you “perpetually afraid of learning that your parents were divorcing”.

WADR, the intent of your father, the operative actor, is really not relevant to a detached understanding of Dread and how it works. The EFFECT is what was important. It got him the desired attention and control.

I want to use my own experience as an example here, which when I look back on it is also an example of Dread (perhaps not Roissy Dread, but still Dread nonetheless). When Mrs. deti told me she wasn’t attracted to me and had been treating me with disrespect that day, I knew I had to do something, because “I love you but I’m not in love with you” was just around the corner. Visions of a process server dropping divorce petitions at my feet in my office, sliding down the razor-lined divorce slide and being forcibly divested of my life’s work danced in my head.

I knew I had to do something, and I wasn’t going to live like that. I simply told her I had no intention of putting up with this anymore, that I would not remain married to a woman who treated me like shit; and that if she did not change her ways and that right soon, the marriage would be over and that the next communications would be through lawyers.

Intent does not matter. I had a desired result in mind: For reasons not really relevant here, I didn’t want a divorce. I wanted and needed to gain some leverage and control to get the marriage back on track, and to change it. If threatening divorce was the way to do it, fine. I didn’t need to create fictional women. I let her know I had (and have) another option, which is to not be married to her anymore. And that option would mean she would be alone and unmarried. It would also mean that a man of my (admittedly) low sociosexual value had divorced and rejected her simply because I had finally sacked up and said “fuck off, I don’t need this shit. I’d rather be alone than be married to a bitch who publicly disrespects me and doesn’t want to sleep with me”. I can’t imagine Mrs. deti would find middle-aged solitude or my beta chump ass rejecting and divorcing her for being intolerable to be optimal or even desirable prospects. What is this if not Dread?

This might be distasteful to you or other readers, but I know I still have that option. I know I can still leave and divorce her if my marriage ever fails to serve my purposes and if Mrs. deti fails to meet my needs. I don’t need other women, real or imagined, to serve those purposes. Whether it’s Roissy-style Dread or not, the EFFECT is the same: to bring the marriage back in line, to give me some hand and leverage, and to gain what I wanted in the marriage (more respect, more sex).

I know you think we’re talking about two different things, but we’re really not. Dread is Dread is Dread. It’s used to bring about an effect. The intent really isn’t important, so long as it brings about the desired effect.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@deti

Susan, you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. I thought morality didn’t matter on this blog.

I have never said that. I have written many posts concerned with the morality and ethics of interpersonal relationships. I write frequently about the immorality of deceit, selfishness, manipulation of others for personal gain, and hypocrisy.

What I have said is that I do not concern myself with sexual morality. If two consenting adults are engaging in sexual activity and not injuring another party, that’s their business. I have no interest in entering other people’s bedrooms. Nor do I feel that virginity should be saved for marriage. I don’t even claim that promiscuity is immoral – though I do believe it is poor strategy for most people.

This is where you’re getting bogged down, I think, because the intent really doesn’t matter as long as the outcome is reached.

The ends justifies the means.

Niccolo Machiavelli

This really says it all. We’re discussing Machiavellian tactics. Other quotes by NM relevant to Game:

It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

A prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise.

One who deceives will always find those who allow themselves to be deceived.

A wise ruler ought never to keep faith when by doing so it would be against his interests.

The promise given was a necessity of the past: the word broken is a necessity of the present.

This cavalier justification for manipulating others for personal gain without regard to the injury exacted is known as the “agentic” or “exploitative” personality. Such individuals are not fit for long-term relationships, and rarely seek them. This is not a personal opinion – the field of study on the Machiavellian personality is very deep and rich.

I cannot control what men do.
“O, what men dare do! What men may do! What men daily
do, not knowing what they do!”

Claudio, Much Ado About Nothing

What I can do is warn women about men who employ Machiavellian tactics. They make very, very poor relationship prospects.

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Deti

OK, let’s clear up the semantics. You and I are on the same page.

I simply told her I had no intention of putting up with this anymore, that I would not remain married to a woman who treated me like shit; and that if she did not change her ways and that right soon, the marriage would be over and that the next communications would be through lawyers.

I hope you recall that I strongly supported your actions in that matter, and I still do. I do not consider that Instilling Dread, as outlined in Roissy’s Dread post. You responded to being disrespected and insulted by your wife in a manner which is fair, honest, and free of manipulative tactics. You stood up for yourself, making clear under which conditions you would leave, and what it would take for you to stay. This is what Mr. HUS did, and in a much smaller way, Stephen in the OP did this as well.

Creating dread is something very different, as it depends on a prolonged state of anxiety and uncertainty. “Will he leave? Why is he flirting with other women in front of me? Why does my husband humiliate me this way?” If anyone instilled Dread, Mrs. deti did!

Dread: Anticipate with great apprehension or fear

Mrs. Deti knows that she need not fear if she gets her act together. She has a roadmap to continued and even improved marital relations, and she knows you prefer not to divorce. Presumably, she has enough trust in your character to believe that if she makes the effort you require of her, you will not leave. She needn’t feel apprehensive or fearful, and you didn’t seek to make her feel that way. Your intent was to assert yourself and your needs in a straightforward manner. That could not be less manipulative.

Intent always matters. Always. Our justice system, and in fact all societal institutions recognize this. There is a world of difference between harming someone intentionally and accidentally. Civilization depends on it.

deti

“If you can’t see anything wrong with that from a moral POV, there’s no point in discussing it further.”

Susan, you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. I thought morality didn’t matter on this blog.

Lokland

@Susan

“Roissy’s preemptive “dread game,” so they’re only addressing the marriage with a death rattle.”

It also has uses on woman who are not worthy of an LTR.
Dread game is for P&D material.
Treat a whore like a whore and a wife like a wife. Simple really.

On another note, if your wife requires dread game to be kept in line.
I’d prefer divorce.
Assuming the problem was not with me (eg. chubby fuck syndrome).

http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

@Lokland

Dread game is for P&D material.
Treat a whore like a whore and a wife like a wife. Simple really.

On another note, if your wife requires dread game to be kept in line.
I’d prefer divorce.

Cosign.

Lokland

@youknow

“The reality is game is designed for the Anne’s of the world and like it or not, it worked like gangbusters on her.”

+1

Certain principles of game can be used to artificially trigger attraction in lower SMV women. Which is a good thing, kinda like make up can trigger attraction in lower SMV men.

An SMV 5 woman demanding a man with lots of options is kinda like a beggar demanding $20 bills.
An SMV 5 man demanding a woman with perfect skin is …

Whats even more annoying is we only seem to discuss the SMV 8+ categories which constitute a small percentage of the population yet dominate 90% of the conversation.

Can’t blame people. There human.

Damien Vulaume

@Bastiat Blogger:
“Mr. HUS Wall Street/Wharton/structured financial products guy is typically—in this SMP—going to be a wild, uncontrollable STR beast where most women are concerned, and so you don’t generally recommend that template to today’s college girls. ”
Sure, that is one of the results of today’s over-obsessed money seeking western societies.
I think that “psw” mentioned the “sacred cows” factor in one of those threads at some point.

Russ in Texas

@youknowwho#800,

Dueling experience.
I wasn’t aware that tailoring your approaches to a given culture constituted gaming. If that’s the case, then the bar is set so low as to be pretty meaningless. While I’m sure that game works like a charm there, the model of female behavior indicating that it would be necessary is simply silly. Culturally speaking, EE, Japan, and Brazil are places where traditionally-western men can clean up without the slightest need for gaming. In Japan particularly, where the culture says *women pursue the men,* the idea that you need game to succeed there is simply ridiculous.

Now, there is a caveat here regarding audience. If you’re referring to somebody who’s been turned into a “feminist victim” and hasn’t Clue One about how the world actually works b/c like a tragic goose he’s been force-fed advice which is literally designed to emasculate him….then any amount of game would be in that man’s favor. But I don’t think you can posit that this man is the norm — perhaps the infection and rot is worse up north.

SayWhaat

Well my point is that the young female commenters on HUS have a much lower probability of being single than the young male commenters.

I don’t think so. Like I said, I didn’t get into a relationship until I was 22. Same thing with Emily.

I view your comment to be equivalent to Where Have All the Good Men Gone?. The good guys and good girls are out there, you just have to know where to look. And/or not ignore them when you find them.

Funny how, by this criteria, the women count, but the men don’t.

*facepalm*

Russ in Texas

@VD
“Basically, it’s a feminine, passive-aggressive response. “I am going to deprive you of my wonderful presence until you are nice to me.”

By way of contrast, compare that action with the High Alpha move of kicking a girl out of her own bed, in her apartment, just so one can sleep more comfortably on an initial overnight visit. That is supreme confidence and the tightest of Indifference Game.

What would your idea of those two men be if you saw a) a man come out of his own apartment with blankets and a pillow, asking if he could sleep on your couch because his wife was being mean, versus b) a woman come out of her own apartment, asking if she could sleep on your couch because she’d been kicked out of her own bed by some guy she’d picked up? Who is the Alpha, (a) or (b)?”

Thanks for the response. I’m still hoping you’ll respond to the first query as well. (My position is separate from Susan’s. I agree that Dread and other forms of game work — I simply don’t think they should always be the go-to tools.)

The last paragraph is self-evident, but moves the goalposts, particularly as you’re trying to reframe the question as one of dominance — for ltr/marriage if binary dominance/submission is an issue, that’s a sign of a relationship that’s in trouble — by comparison, both parties benefit WILDLY by continually “throwing dove to dove.”

Now, caveat: if I had a shit-hard uncomfortable couch, or crashing on it was somehow a punishment, then I would agree with Ted and HELL no, I’m not to punish myself because she acted poorly. But I’m an avid catnapper and crashing on the couch is no punishment.

(re: Ted notice I haven’t mentioned sex. If I want sex, I get sex. That’s a different discussion: I’m the gatekeepe